



E458 




Q 


I^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^H 


• 





.W28 






¥■.- 



\* .0 



x^r. 









>*AA*AAAAifcfcA^ - 



^F^^F^^^F^>^V^^H^I^^^^^P9^^i*iiWiV^P<«M 



^"^W^^l 



tiSi^ 



Wo 



m 



A SOLUTION 








#Er S^atioMl Siffialties; 



: % 



CITIZEISr OF THE UTSTITED STATES. 



^ 5 CINCINNATI: c^a 

^ fiAZETTlC STKAM PRTNTING HOUSE, CORNER FOURTH AND VINE STREETS. 



18G3. 



C>S^9(^^ 



^ 



(a: 




■AAAAA^^rtM 



■Ai**i^AAAAAAikA«ati*< 



"(s) v:£^ - b 



'^^^•^'•WfWWW^^f^WW^^^'W^^'^^F^ 



^^^«»^"R»^»i^^»^^^"^^^WW»^»»^^^^>^^^>^^Fl^^^*^ 



A SOLUTION 




DifBciilties : 



OITIZES OF THE TJIsriTED STA'J'ES. 



V. 



\ 



.V. 



((^ 



^H<i^ 



^ U. S. A, 



rCIKClNNATI 



OAZETtE STEAM PRINTING HOUSE, CORNER FOURTH AND VINE STREETS. 

1863. 



HAS-'? 



f 



Entered, according to Act of Congress, in the year 1863, bj 

MARVIN WARREN, 

la the Cork's Ofucc of tlie District Court of the United States for the Northern 

District of Ohio. 



'^A S-/d 




PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 
OF ALL PARTIES— LOYALISTS AND INSURGENTS, 

NATIVE AND FOREIGN BORN ; 

WITH AFFECTIONATE REGARD FOR YOU ALL, 

TO you, AND TO THOSE THAT SHALL COME AFTER YOU, 

J iSrtiiratf t|)is ilittlr Smorl^, 

Your most humble servant. 

And fellow citizen, 

THE AUTHOR. 
July 4, 1863. 



A.ISr^LYSIS. 



CHAPTER I. 

PRELIMINARY REMARKS. 



PAGF. 

What is a Solution ? 7 

Partj Spirit, 8 

Slavery, 9 

Who of us at Fault ? 9 

Explanation of Terms 10 

" The Constitution as it is, and the Union as it was," 10 

CHAPTER II. 

PROBLEM I. — WHAT IS THE CAUSE OF OUR PRESENT NATIONAL DIFFICULTIES ? 

There is a Fundamental Wrong, 11 

What constitutes the Foundation of the Government, 11 

Freedom of Speech. 

1. Freedom of Speech — Definition of, 13 

2. Who May Exercise the Freedom of Speech, 14 

3 . Toleration of Opinion, 14 

4. Manner of Exercising the Freedom of Speech, 15 

5. Subjects of Free Speech, 15 

6. When the Freedom of Speech may be Exercised, 17 

7. Where the Freedom of Speech may be Exercised, 17 

8. Abuse of the Privilege of Free Speech, . ,20 

9. Freedom of Speech long since Destroyed, 21 

Purity of Elections, 

1. Definition of, 23 

2. Restraint by Violence, 23 

3. Corrupting by Fear of Insurrection, :24 

Sovereignty of the Majority, 

1. What is the Sovereignty of the Majority V 27 

2. Sanctity of All Lavrs, 29 

3. Compromises, 32 

We have Abandoned the Experiment of Our FaUiers, 37 



6 Analysis. 

CHAPTER III. 

PROBLEM II. — TIIK UEMEDY FOR OUR NATIONAL DIFFICULTIES. 

Foundation of the Government must be Restored, 40 

What the People should do, 40 

What the Government should do, 41 

(Constitutionality of these Measures, 42 

Xo Other Remedy, 51 

CHAPTER IV. 

CONCLUDING REMARKS. 

The Present Civil War, 54 

Emancipation as a War Measure, 54 

Military Arrests, 55 

Who Accountable for the Rebellion, 56 

How should the Rebels be dealt with when Conquered, 58 

Our Trust must b« in God, 60 



^ SOLXJTIOISr 

O F 

OUR Is^ATIOI^AL DIFFICULTIES. 



CHAPTER I. 

PRELIMINARY REMARKS. 

WHAT IS A SOLUTION ? 

In the science of Mathematics, or quantities, there are a. 
few plain, self-evident truths called axioms, such as the follow- 
ing : If equal quantities be equally increased, their amounts 
will be equal ; if equal quantities be equally diminished, their 
remainders will be equal. By the successive application of 
such plain truths as these, the Mathematician goes forward 
step by step with absolute certainty, and at length brings out 
the ansAver to the most complicated question in the science ; 
and the answer thus obtained, is not correct merely in his 
opinion, but he absolutely knows it to be so. This is solution. 

So in the science of Government, there are a very few plain 
truths, easily comprehended, and readily assented to by every 
man, by the proper application of which, the mos't difficult and 
complicated questions may be solved with the same absolute 
certainty as in Mathematics. 

What is the cause of our present National difficulties ? 
And what is the remedy to be applied for them? These are 
the two questions, the solution of which is the object of this 
little work. It is proposed to solve them by the use of such 
axioms, or self-evident truths and historic facts as are familiar 
to all, and often referred to and repeated by the advocates of 
all parties. 

Those who ponder carefully these axioms or truths, and the 
relation and bearing that each one has upon the subject, will 
agree that this solution is the only correct one of the two 
momentous questions before us. 

But in this, the utmost care and attention is necessary. 
There are diamonds in the earth — but they lie not upon the 



8 A Solution of Our National Difficulties. 

surface to be picked up by the casual observer. Deep excava- 
tion must be made — and when the diamond is reached, close 
scrutiny is required to distinguish it from other earthy substance. 
So in this solution; the choice truths which pertain to it, lie 
mingled with a vast amount of other extraneous truths — 
amongst the whole of which search must be made, and as fast 
as we discover the objects of our search, one by one, they must 
be selected and carefully preserved for our use. The difficulty 
lies not in comprehending the material truths, but in separating 
them from those that are immaterial, and in rightly applying 
each one in its proper order and place. 

PARTY SPIRIT. 

The reason why we arrive at such different and opposite 
results, in solving our problems in the science of Government, 
is because we come to the task with minds clogged with party 
prejudices and passions. The subject is susceptible of the 
same absolute certainty, as that of Mathematics, and if we 
would come to its study with minds as free to properly com- 
prehend and apply every principle pertaining to it, as Ave do 
in the solution of questions in arithmetic, we would as uniformly 
agree in our final results and conclusions. 

The baneful effects of party spirit cannot be better stated 
than is done by President Washington in his Farewell Address. 
Speaking of this spirit of party, he says : " It serves always to 
" distract the public councils and enfeeble the public administra- 
" tion. It agitates the community with ill-founded jealousies 
" and false alarms ; kindles the animosity of one part against 
" another ; foments occasionally riot and insurrection. It opens 
" the door to foreign influence and corruption, which find a 
" facilitated access to the Government itself through the 
" channels of party passion." 

" There is an opinion that parties, in free countries, are 
" useful checks upon the administration of the Government, 
" and serve to keep alive the spirit of liberty. This v.ithin 
" certain limits is probably true ; and in Governments of a 
" monarchial cast, patriotism may look with indulgence, if not 
" with favor, upon the spirit of party. But in those of the 
" popular character, in Governments purely elective, it is a 
" spirit not to be encouraged. From their natural tendency, it 
" is certain there will always be enough of that spirit for every 
" salutary purpose ; and there being constant danger of 
" excess, the effort ought to be, by force of public opinion, to 
" mitigate and assuage it." 

The writer of this little work has endeavored to divest 
himself of all party bias in its preparation ; he fully believes 



A Solution of Our National Difficulties. 9 

he lias done so, and asks tlic reader to come to, its perusal with 
the same spirit of impartiality. There is no good reason Avhy 
\ve should hold such opposite views. Surely some, or all of 
us, are in error, and by reason of this error, our common 
country has been brought into great peril and disaster. Who 
will not now make one determined effort to know the whole 
truth, to reason correctly, and to discover the real evil, though 
it should be found with his own party, or even with himself. 

WHO OF us AT FAULT ? 

Let no one imagine that in the perusal of this Avork he will 
find himself or his party exonerated from fault in the origin of 
our present National difficulties. On the contrary, although 
there are great differences in degrees of fault, yet a portion of 
the fault lies with every party, every section of the country, 
and almost every citizen. 

SLAVERY. 

Some there are, who profess to believe that Slavery is a very 
bad institution; that it is wicked, immoral, impoverishing to 
the country, and a national dishonor; and that it ought to be 
done away. Others advocate the opinion that it is ordained of 
God, founded upon the laws of the Bible ; that it is right and 
honorable, calculated to impart to both races the highest degree 
of improvement and social happiness, and that it should be 
extended and perpetuated by the National Government. And 
still others there are, who think it a'n evil, but at the same 
time hold that it should not be done away, for fear of still 
greater evils that might result. 

As- these conflicting opinions, with a variety of questions of 
Constitutional law relating to the same subject, constitute the 
great theme of distractioh amongst us, it may be supposed that 
this solution will treat largely of these questions ; but having 
gone carefully over the whole solution, the Avriter is unable to 
see that the subject of Slavery, in any of these phases, has 
any place in it. It may be true, as some have declared, that 
this nation cannot or could not long exist half slave and half 
free ; but whatever truth there may lie in this, those who are 
intrusted with the administration of the general Government have 
nothing to do with it. The Government should be administered 
upon the principle of the Constitution, leaving each of the 
different systems of social and political organization, recognized 
by the Constitution, to advance in growth, or die out and give 
place to others, just as their respective merits or demerits may 
destine them. 



10 A Solution of Our National Bifficultles. 

EXLANATION OP TERMS. 

Wherever the "word citizen, or people, is used in this solution, 
let it be understood to mean white citizen or white people. 
This, however, is not assuming to determine the great question 
of colored citizenship in this country. But for all the purposes 
of this solution, it will be sufficient to confine the meaning of 
the term citizen, or people, to the white race alone. 

" THE CONSTITUTION AS IT IS, AND THE UNION AS IT WAS." 

The fault lies not in the Constitution. One party of the 
present day has adopted the correct maxim in this particular. 
Our fathers have given us a correct chart by which, to guide 
our Ship of State ; and now that we find her ready to founder 
amidst shoals and quick-sands, it would only increase our 
danger at this critical moment, to either cast away our chart, 
or to begin to mark out new courses upon it. There is safety 
in only one course of action now ; and that is, to turn to our 
chart, examine it carefully, observe where we have deviated 
from its course and directions, return to these with the utmost 
caution, and with the least possible delay, and then for the 
future adhere to them. 



A Solution of Our National Difficulties. 11 



OHAPTEK II. 

PROBLEM I. — WHAT IS THE CAUSE OF OUR PRESENT NA- 
TIONAL DIFFICULTIES? 

THERE IS A FUNDAMENTAL AVKONG. 

It is an axiom in the science of government, tliat every gov- 
ernment must have its foundation. Every government, hke 
every building, is made up of a foundation and superstructure. 
If any part of the superstructure of a buikling be removed, 
the building will be more or less damaged, and rendered less 
adapted to its use ; but if the foundation be taken aAvay, the 
entire superstructure must fall together in a mass of ruins. 
And precisely so it is -with governments. Whilst it is detrimen-. 
tal to a government to disregard any of its laws, it is even 
ruinous and fiital to the government itself, to trample upon and 
violate its fundamental principles, or any of them. 

Now we know where the wrong lies from the eftcct produced. 
This government of ours has not sustained injury merely in 
some part or parts of its superstructure. This cannot be. The 
whole fabric, for years, has been shaken as if by the unseen 
power of the mighty earthquake, and is even now threatened 
with overthrow and irreparable ruin. We all know that such 
results as these can only be produced by some cause at the 
foundation. 

It is plain, then, that in searching for the cause of tliese 
difficulties which are upon us, we must direct our att<?ntion to 
the foundation of the Government. First, we must examine 
carefully, and see what the foundation consists of; and then 
ascertain how and wherein it has been impaired ; or whether, 
in fact, it was not originally defective and insufficient to answer 
the purpose. So sure as effect never follows without a cause, 
so sure shall we find on examination, either that the foundation 
of this national Government has been in some manner impaired, 
or else the conclusion is upon us, irresistible, that it was orig- 
inally defective and fallacious ; or, in other words, either the 
experiment of our Fathers is about to prove a failure, or else we 
have ceased to try it. 

WHAT CONSTITUTES THE FOUNDATION OF THE GOVERNMENT. 

The freedom of speech, the purity of elections, and the 
sovereignty of the majority, constitute the Foundation of this 
Government. 



12 A Solution of Our National Difficulties. 

By tlie plan and genius of this Government, the Tvill of the 
people is the source of all authority in this country. This 
could be proved by the Constitution, and the teachings of the 
Fathers, but it is not necessary that it should be proved here in 
any manner, for no one denies it. It is the first maxim in the 
political creed, not of any one party, but of all parties, and of 
the "vvhole country. 

This will of the people is absolute in its authority. It rises 
above presidents, congresses, courts, legislatures, governors, 
and even above the Constitution itself; for by the terms of that 
instrument, it is subject to change by authority of the people, 
and in no other manner. In a -word, the people are the final 
arbiters, by whose authority, either directly or indirectly, every 
controversy is decided. They constitute the high court of last 
resort, for the trial of every question of Constitutional laAV 
and of public policy, and from their decision there is no appeal. 

The people, however, differ amongst themselves upon almost 
all questions brought before them. Their Avills do not gener- 
ally agree. This makes it indispensably necessary that some 
rule be established for determining what constitutes the will of 
the people. For this purpose every citizen is held to be enti- 
tled to equal political power with every other, and the will of 
the greater number, or majority, is taken and held as the will 
of the people. And this construction establishes the sover- 
eignty of the majority, as a fundamental principle of the Gov- 
ernment, for all purposes except for a change of the Constitu- 
tion, which requires more than a majority, as specified in the 
Constitution itself. 

Although the will of the people is the foundation of all 
authority, yet this proposition is the mere theory of the subject. 
Unless there be some laws of action laid down, by which the 
will of the people caij be formed and expressed, the theory 
amounts to nothing. In order to give efiect to the theory, two 
other things are necessary besides the rule of the sovereignty 
of the majority : first, the freedom of speech ; and second, the 
purity of elections. Without the freedom of speech, the wdll 
of the people cannot be enlightened, or rather no will can be 
formed ; and without the purity of elections, their will cannot 
be expressed, though ever so well formed and enlightened. 

The people of these United States constitute one great 
legislative body, with the highest powers and responsibilities. 
What would any legislative body do without the power of free 
discussion amongst themselves, or the power of voting ? 

When any subject comes before a legislative body, the first 
business is the discussion, or consideration amongst themselves; 
the second is the voting ; and third, the declaring of the result, 



A Solution of Our National Difficulties 13 

which requires an application of the rule of the sovereignty 
of the majority. And this is the order in which these three 
great fundamental laws stand related one to another and to all 
other laws in this country. True, the people do not vote di- 
rectly for or against the laws, but they vote for, and elect for 
themselves representatives, who make and unmake the laws, 
and this is substantially the same thing. 

The voting must have precedence of any application of the 
rule of the sovereignty of the majority, because without the 
voting there is nothing upon which the rule can operate. And 
the discussion must come before the voting, otherwise the peo- 
ple, have no will to express by their voting; or in other words, 
they come to no understanding amongst themselves upon the 
subject, and are in the condition of the builders at the Tower 
of Babel, with a common purpose, but no common counsel. 

Here is the foundation of this Government. By the three 
great fun<lamental laws, of free discussion, purity of elections, 
and the sovereignty of the majority, the Fathers designed that 
every other law should be defined, every difference reconciled, 
and every right and interest adjusted in a peaceable manner. 
This was their ej^periment. Has their experiment failed, or 
have we ceased to try it? This is the question now to be an- 
swered. Have we been maintaining the freedom of speech, the 
purity of elections, and the sovereignty of the majority, or 
have we not ? 

Before we can determine whether we have been maintaining 
these fundamental principles or not, it becomes necessary to 
examine carefully and see in what they severally consist. We 
must, in the first place, see that we understand ourselves, and 
one another, when we talk about the freedom of speech, the 
purity of elections, and the sovereignty of the majority. This 
being done, we shall be prepared to examine into the adminis- 
tration of the Government, past and present, and see whether 
these principles have been maintained. 

FREEDOM OP SPEECH. 

Definition of. 

The Freedom of Speech consists in the liberty of every cit- 
izen, freely to express his opinions, in any manner, on all sub- 
jects, and at all times and places, being answerable only for 
an abuse of the privilege. No one can deny the correctness 
of this definition, if the whole of it be taken together, including 
the qualification at the close. The precise extent of meaning, 
however, that belongs to each of its several parts as tliey stand 
thus qualified, is not clear, by any means, without much study 
and reflection. Let us, therefore, take up the several parts of 
the definition, one by one, and, by careful analysis, endeavor 



14 A Solution of Our JSfational Difficulties. 

to ascertain Jcfinitelj tlic true meaning of each part, and tlie 
"W'holc of the definition. 

Who may Exercise the Freedom of Speech. 

In the definition already given it is stated that the right of 
free speech extends to every citizen. The word citizen, how- 
ever, is variously applied. Sometimes it is used to denote any 
man, woman or child who is a member of the community, and 
entitled to the protection of the laws. Atother times it is used 
to distinguish such only as are allowed to exercise political pow- 
ers, and have the privilege of voting. For the purposes of this 
solution, the meaning of the term may be restricted to this lat- 
ter class alone; and we need not inquire here, what privileges 
of speech may or may not be exercised by any except those 
who are allowed the right to vote. 

Amongst those having the right to vote, there can be no 
distinction or difference in respect to the right of speech. Each 
citizen voter being entrusted with the same amount of sover- 
eign power as every other, there can be no subordinates, no 
superiors. It is just as necessary for one to have access to all 
available means of information as for another; and, in legal 
contemplation, the opinion or judgment of any one is entitled 
to as much weight and consideration as that of any other. 
The right of free speech, then, is, from reason and necessity, 
inherent in every voter, at least. 

Toler a/ion of Opitiion. 

The word opinion, used in our definition of the freedom 
of speech, must there be taken to mean that Avhich any one 
claims to be his opinion. We cannot probe the secrets of men's 
hearts or minds to know whether they really believe that which 
they affirm. 

It makes no difference how false or absurd the opinion may 
be. The freedom of speech requires that no one shall exercise 
any prerogative over another in judging between truth and 
falsehood; and that every one may advocate, not that which iV 
true only, but that which he claims to be so. If the doctrines 
thus advocated by any one are manifestly false and absurd, the 
advocacy of them will do no harm; and if there be in them 
any appearance of truth, they should not be suppressed. 

Tlie law of free speech is based upon the theory that the 
people, taken as a whole, arc capable of judging between truth 
and falsehood, when both arc fully and freely presented. Ami 
this was the principle held by the Fathers, that the advocacy of 
error could safely be tolerated while the truth is left free to 
combat it. From this view it is plain that it is incompatible 



A Solution of Our National Difficulties. 15 

with the law of free speech, to suppress the advocacy of any 
doctrine or opinion, on the ground that it is false or absurd. 

Manner of Excrcis'uixj the Freedom of Speech. 

The freedom of speech includes the Freedom of the Press. 
Writing and printing are but different modes of speech. What- 
ever a citizen has a right to declare in person orally, he also 
has a right to declare by writing, printing and publishing ; or 
by employing others to perform any or all these offices for him. 
And this implies the right to be secure in the possession of 
papers, printing presses, types and books, and the inviolability 
of the right of property in his publications, when being trans- 
mitted through the mails or otherwise. 

Whatever a man has a right to declare, he has a right to 
declare by such means and instrumentalities as he himself 
chooses to adopt. And it is his right to be unmolested in the 
use of these means, whatever they may be. And let it be un- 
derstood, that wherever the term Freedom of Speech, occurs 
in this solution, it embraces in its meaning the freedom of the 
Press, as well as oral discussion. 

Subjects of Free Speech. 

In this country, by virtue of the present form of our Gov- 
ernment, the people are the absolute disposers of every thing. 
There is no law, no institution, and no interest too high or 
sacred for them to touch. Restrained they are, it is true, by the 
constitutions of the several States and of the United States, 
yet even these, by the terms of those very instruments them- 
selves, are subject to change at the absolute will of the people. 

In the Declaration of Independence, our Fathers said, that 
"Whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these 
ends,"' (namely, ' life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness,' ) 
"it is the right of the people to alter, or to abolish it, and to 
institute a new Government, laying its foundations on such 
principles, and organizing its powers in such form, as to them 
shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness'' 
According to this theory the people have at their absolute 
disposal their highest and most sacred organic laws and insti- 
tutions. It is true, according to the language of the Declara- 
tion, the right of the people to abolish their Government 
depends upon the contingency that it has become destructive 
of its ends of securing life, lil)erty and the pursuit of liappi- 
ness; but, at the same time, the people are to be the sole, 
absolute judges of the existence, or non-existence of this con- 
tingency, and if they judge wrong, there is no appeal and no 
help for it. 



16 A Solution of Our Naiional Difficulties. 

In recognition of this great cardinal doctrine of the Decla- 
ration of Independence, the Constitution of the United States, 
and those of the several States, have been framed, each with a 
provision for its change by authority of the people. It is true, 
any change in the Constitution of the United States, or of any 
of the States, in order to be legitimate, must be made in the 
manner, and by such majorities as are specified and required 
in those Constitutions respectively. But when the people pro- 
ceed in such manner, and by such majorities, as are required 
by their organic laws, to make changes in the same, they may 
make any change that they see fit, and their action in so doing 
is as legitimate and valid as any other that they can do. 

If, then, the people have such absolute legitimate power over 
their primary or organic laws, surely they have no less power 
over those that are secondary, and created in pursuance of the 
primary. And this covers the whole ground. There are no 
other laws, known to political organizations, but primary and 
secondary ; and from this it is perfectly plain that the people 
have absolute legitimate authority over all the laws of the land. 
They may modify any of them in any manner they see fit, or 
abolish them altogether and adopt new ones. 

And if the people have such unlimited power over their laws, 
they have no less power over all their institutions. For every 
institution is supported by some law or laws ; and it would be 
strange indeed, if the law that supports an institution could be 
abrogated by the people, and yet the institution itself remain 
untouched or undisturbed. Such a thing could not be. 

Now the privilege or right of discussion must be co-extensive 
with the power to make and unmake laws. This is a self-evi- 
dent truth. What is there, then, that the people have not the 
right to discuss? That which is constitutional and lawful they 
must have the right to discuss, because they have power to 
make it unconstitutional and unlawful ; that which is neither 
constitutional nor lawful they must have the right to discuss, 
because they have power to make it constitutional and lawful ; 
that which is local they must have the right to discuss, because 
they have power to make it general ; and that which is general 
they must have the right to discuss, because they have power 
to make it local; and in every case, whether they will make any 
of these changes, or suffer all things to remain as they are, 
must be determined by discussion, and mutual interchange of 
opinions and views. 

The proper subjects of free speech, then, extend to all po- 
litical institutions, and to all matters and things that are in 
any manner the subjects of law, or which any one proposes or 
claims should be made so. This is carrying the demonstration 



A Solution of Our National Difficulties. 17 

as fill- as we have any need of for our present purpose ; and it 
would not pertain to this solution to inquire to what other sub- 
jects the law of free speech extends, 

TF/icu the Freedom of Speech may he Exercised, 

The people are called upon frequently, at stated periods, to 
pass judgment upon both the men and measures by which they 
are governed. To enable them to do this" with justice to them- 
selves and the country, they must have an uninterrupted ac- 
quaintance with governmental events as they transpire. True, 
there are exceptions to this rule ; there are plans and doings 
of the Government connected Avith its foreign relations and 
military operations that for the time being are necessary to be 
kept secret within the immediate counsels of the Government. 
But there is no necessity at any time, for keeping secret the 
general purposes of the Government, or the principles upon 
which it is being administered ; but, on the contrary, it is highly 
necessary that these should not only be plainly declared by the 
Government itself, at all times, but that the means for an ac- 
quaintance with these, be open to every citizen. 

There must, therefore, be no interruption in the toleration 
of the laws of free speech. In peace and in war, the rules of 
free speech are the same ; but the circumstances and facts to 
which those rules are to be applied, diifer very essentially, at 
different times. It is only necessary, however, that we obtain 
a clear knowledge of these rules, and we will have no difhcidty 
in making the application under all the varied circumstances 
that arise from time to time. 

Where the Freedom of Speech may he Exercised. 

At what places, and to whom, may a citizen declare his 
opinions ? This is an important inquiry. If we consider 
what the objects and necessities are, for the maintenance of the 
freedom of speech, it will enable us to understand fully this 
part of our subject. These objects and necessities are two-fold : 
first, to insure good laws ; and, second, to insure their supremacy. 
Or, in other words, to insure, first, wise counsels, and second, 
peace and harmony. How shall these objects be accomplished? 

The country is made up of a great variety of interests ; and 
the history of our race shows, that generally, each man is 
inclined to view every thing in the light of his own interests, 
with comparatively litte regard for the interests or rights of 
others. This js accounted for upon principles perfectly con- 
sistent with the honesty of all men. It results from the fact 
that, generally, in this world of labor and anxiety, men find 
enough to do, to properly care for their own interests and 



18 A Solution of Our JSfational Difficulties. 

rights, without burdening their minds with those of other 
people. This is not universally true, but generally it is so. 
And hence the absolute necessity of continual free intercourse 
amongst citizens of all the various shades of interests that 
make up the community of the nation. 

Unless this intercourse be kept up, so as to enable each 
citizen to reason with all his fellow citizens, upon the subjects of 
his rights, his interests, his motives and his desires, the effect 
will quickly be seen in mutual bickerings and hatred. This 
result Avill follow just as certain, and just as natural, as any 
other in the moral or material world. And yet it is not 
because men are disposed to do each other wrong, but simply 
from mutual misunderstanding. 

Where people live together in the same locality or State, 
this mutual intercourse, and interchange of thoughts and 
views amongst themselves, is much more likely to be kept up, 
and more difficult to be prevented, than between citizens living 
in distant parts of the confederacy ; and hence, so far as the 
action of the Government is concerned, in the preservation of 
free speech, much more will be required to be done for its 
maintenance between the citizens of diff"erent parts of the 
confederacy, than between those of the same parts. Because, 
looking at the matter in the light of reason, as well as observa- 
tion, it is plain that a misunderstanding between diff'erent 
sections of the confederacy, is fully as fatal to the peace and 
harmony of the country, as though it were between the people 
of the same sections or States. 

The freedom of speech, then, does not consist in the privilege 
of expressing one's views in his own State, nor in his own 
section of the country, but in all the States, and in all sections 
and localities of the country, and everywhere, on land and 
sea, wherever the national flag floats. It does not consist in 
the privilege of expressing one's views merely to his fellow- 
citizens of his OAvn State, or his own section of the country, 
l)ut to all his fellow-citizens of all the States, and of every 
locality. And the American citizen who has not this privilege, 
does not enjoy the freedom of speech. 

But it will be said that there are some matters of local concern 
merely, which the people of other sections of the country have 
no right to discuss in the locality of their existence. There is 
no greater error than this, and none more fatal. We have 
already seen, that, by the doctrines of the Declaration of 
Independence, and the provisions of the Constitution, the 
people of these United States, as one political association, have 
poAver to change even their most sacred organic laws in any 
manner they see fit. To make that local which is general, and 



A Solution of Our National Difficulties. 19 

tli<at general wliich is local ; to abolish that which is either 
general or local, and that which is neither general nor local, 
to ordain and establish, as either or both, are all acts strictly 
within the legitimate poAVcr of the people of these United 
States, which they may accomplisli by changes in their organic 
law, if in no other manner. And in all cases, and at all times, 
the propriety or impropriety, justice or injustice of any and 
all such changes, is to be determined by mutual counsel and 
delibration amongst all the people, and not a part. 

Moreover, aside from all considerations of organic change, 
if there be any thing in the laws or institutions of any State, 
which any citizen of any other State believes to be unconsti- 
tutional, or detrimental to his rights or interests, or detrimental 
to the rights or interests or honor of anybody else, or of the 
whole country, what is there improper or wrong if such person 
express his views upon the sul:)jeet to the people of the State 
where such laws or institutions exist ? Who has authority to 
say that he shall not do this ? The exercise of such a right is 
neither in conflict with the Constitution of the United States, 
nor wjth any State Law or Constitution that is itself Constitu- 
tional. And the more such free expression is exercised and 
encouraged between the several parts of the country, the more 
permanent will be our peace and prosperity. 

The freedom of speech is no local right, nor can it be, con- 
sistent with the peace and safety of the country or government. 
Where there is no freedom of speech, the people become 
ignorant of their own interests. All their earnings and 
resources are at the disposal of a few, and this creates a 
monopoly for corrupting the entire nation and government. 
Being shut out from the rest of the world, and no ray of light 
permitted to come to them, unless tinged by the coloring of 
their politicians, the people form false ideas of the doings and 
motives of their fellow countrymen in other parts, and of the 
Government under Avhich they live, and it becomes perfectly 
easy to incite their passions of hatred, revenge, insubordination 
and rebellion. 

Let the freedom of speech be destroyed in a single State of 
this Union, and we will have a power, the natural antagonist of 
Republican Government, the baneful influence of which will 
be felt, to some extent, throughout all the others. Let the 
same be done in a number of them, constituting even any 
considerable minority of the whole, and avg ayHI have a com- 
bination of corrupt influences, against which, the friends of 
free government, may hope in vain, to contend successfully for 
many years. 

Then let it not be said that it is no concern of the people of 
one State whether the freedom of speech be preserved in the 



20 A Solution of Our National Difficulties. 

other States or not. To destroy tlic freedom of speech in any 
State, or in any locality, is an injury to the people, not of that 
State or locality merely, but of the whole country. It is the 
right of every citizen, not only to have the means of information 
himself, but to demand that every other citizen, in all other 
States, as well as his own, shall enjoy the same privilege ; for 
the safety of his Government, and the safety of every inter- 
est and right that he holds dear, depends upon it. 

Abuse of the Privilege of Free S^^cech. 

All that Ave have said upon the subject of free speech, must 
be taken Avith this qualification, that there should be no abuse 
of the privilege. The abuses irito Avhich Ave are liable to fall, 
consist in the uttering of scandal, or matter treasonable, or 
inciting to the commission of crime, or the A'iolation of laAv. 

The hiAV of scandal, so far as it relates to individual detrac- 
tion, being generally quite Avell understood and settled in this 
country, and not ha\'ing any immediate bearing upon the 
subject of this solution, need not be discussed here at all, 
further than to observe, that no one has any right so to exercise 
the liberty of speech, as to commit unnecessary or malicious 
detraction against the character of another, anyAvhere, at any 
time, or under any circumstances Avhatsoever. And this rule 
holds good in respect to candidates for office, and those in office, 
as Avell as other persons. 

Treason against the United States, is defined by the Consti- 
tution, as consisting " only in levying war against them, or 
in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort." 
If then the country be in a state of Avar, there are many Avays 
in which a citizen may be guilty of treason merely in the use 
of speech, either by speaking, writing, printing or publishing. 
Every word that conveys valuable information to the enemy in 
respect to the position, strength or supply of armies ; or in 
respect to the plans of the military authorities of our Govern- 
ment ; or any Avord that Avould deceive or mislead our oAvn 
authorities in respect to the position, strength or plans of the 
enemy ; or any use of speecli that hinders our Government in 
the raising of armies or supplies, or aids the enemy in doing 
the same, is giving aid and comfort to the enemy, is treasonable, 
and constitutes an abuse of the freedom of speech. 

Of course it makes no difference Avhether the Avar is a foreign 
or domestic one; only in this, that if it be a domestic one, the 
opportunities for doing these things, to the advantage of the 
enemy, and to the injury of our OAvn Government, are much 
greater than in case of a foreign Avar. Nor does it make any 
difference Avhether our Government, or the enemy, is justified in 
the cause of the Avar, or in its beginning or purposes. 



A Solufion of Our Nat 107} al Difficulties. 21 

The act of "levying war" against the United States is 
treason. To levy war is to make war, or begin it, and this 
may be done by grand forcible resistance to the acts of the 
Government in the performance of its functions, as well as by 
onward aggressive attack. And if war be actually levied by 
either mode against the Government, every citizen by whose 
counsel or advice the same has l)een done, is guilty of abetting 
treason, in the abuse of free speech. 

To counsel, advise or encourage the violation of any law, is 
also an abuse of the freedom of speech. And it matters not 
whether the law be of a civil or criminal character, or whether 
designed for public or private protection. Nor does it make 
any difference whether the law be established by legislative, 
executive or judicial authority, provided the authority be that 
of the United States, or of any State acting as a member of 
the confederacy of the United States. Every decision of a 
Court of Justice, and every rule, regulation or proclamation of 
the Chief Executive of the United States, or of any State, or 
of any Executive Officer, acting under the authority of either 
of these, in the performance of his duties, is a law, the violation 
of which no man has any right to instigate or advise, any 
more than those that emanate from the legislative branch of 
the Government, and are found upon the Statute Books of the 
country. 

Nor does it make any difference whether the law be good or 
Imd, constitutional or unconstitutional. For after all, these 
characteristics are but matters of opinion, and if each man is 
to be governed by his own opinion in these things, then no law 
will have any force. If any law is, in our opinion, unconstitu- 
tional, or in any thing unjust or unwise, this is a sufficient 
reason for us to seek, in the lawful and constitutional way, to 
have it repealed or abrogated, but is no justification for its 
violation, or for counseling the same. To discuss the laws is 
one thing, to "Spit upon, despise, and trample" upon them, is- 
quite another. 

It must also be observed, that a person may abuse the freedom 
of speech by instigating resistance to authorities or the 
violation of law, without directly counseling the same to be 
done ; and this may be either from his very manner and in the 
use of such language as fires the passions of men; or it may 
result more from the circumstances of the excited state of the 
public mind, combined with his criminal neglect to season his 
speech with suitable precautionary advice. 

The Freedom of Speech has' long since been Destroyed. 

Having now examined into the law of free speech, so far, at 
least, as it relates to political discussion, and having seen in 



22 A Solution of Our National Difficulties. 

Avliat the law consists, we are now prepared to examine into 
the past and present condition and usages of the country, and 
see whether this law is and has been maintained amongst us 
or not. If every citizen is permitted freely to express all his 
opinions upon all the laws and institutions of the country, and 
upon all political subjects, at all times, in ail places, and in 
any manner that he sees fit, subject onl^^ to answer for any 
abuse of the privilege, then we have political freedom of speech, 
but otherwise not. 

Now, how is this, and how has it been heretofore ? Has 
every citizen of each and every State been permitted to mingle 
freely and safely in the society of every other State and 
everywhere, and to all his fellow-citizens of those States, to 
express all his opinions upon all the laws and institutions of 
the country, and upon all political topics ? Every one knows 
that it has been far otherwise. For forty years the subject of 
Slavery has been one of the leading subjects of political inter- 
est, and intimately connected with almost all other subjects of 
national politics. During all this period, the interest upon this 
subject between the Northern and Southern sections of the 
country has become more and more intensified, and from 1850 
to 18(50, it was in fact the all-absorbing question, that swallowed 
up every other in our National politics. And yet, strange to 
say, in proportion as the subject became great in interest and 
importance, the freedom of speech was curtailed between the 
North and the South upon it, until finally, for some years pre- 
vious to the breaking out of the present rebellion, only one 
side of the question could be advocated at all, by any body, to 
any available extent, in the fifteen slave States of the Union. 

For all practical purposes, in arraying one section of the 
country in deadly hostility against the other, the destruc- 
tion of free speech was complete. It is true, the people of the 
North Avere permitted to declare their own sentiments in their 
own section of the country, but, as Ave have already seen, this 
does not constitute the freedom of speech. No citizen of the 
United States enjoys the freedom of speech, unless he has this 
privilege, not only in his own section of the country, but in 
all other sections. Nothing short of this privilege, enjoyed by 
all the citizens of the United States, constitutes a national free 
speech ; and nothing short of this, will answer any purpose of 
saving the country from anarchy, or the Government from 
overthrow. 

The truth, then, is simply this, that so far as relates to the 
freedom of speech, the first one of the three great fundamen- 
tal principles of the Government as laid down by the Fathers, 
we have discarded their foundation, and have been trying to 



A Solution of Our National Difficulties. 23 

build upon something else, or upon nothing. And hence we 
have accounted, at least in part, for the calamities -which are 
upon us. 

It matters not now, by whose fault it was that the freedom 
of speech was destroyed amongst us ; it is sufficient to know, 
for our present purpose, that it was destroyed. 

THE PURITY OF ELECTIONS. 
Di'finidon Of, 

AYe come now to consider the second great fundamental law 
of our Government, the Purity of Elections. This consists in 
the/r(?e exercise, hy everij citizen voter, of the rigid to vote strictly 
according to his oivn judgment, without I'cstraint from violence, 
and tvithout influence from fear or favor. Of course the free- 
dom of speech, however well maintained, will avail nothing 
without the purity of elections. 

Restraint hy Violence. 

To exercise any restraint by violence,'over a voter, in respect 
to the casting of his vote, is such a palpable violation of the 
principles of Republican government as to need no process of 
reasoning to show the true character and criminality of such 
an act. This right of freedom on the part of the voter, implies 
also every right that is incident and necessary to it. The right 
of personal safety and liberty in going to the polls ; and the 
right to confer with his fellow-citizens for the purpose of putting 
candidates in nomination, and the preparation of ballots, are 
all rights just as necessary to be exercised by him, as the right 
of choice amongst candidates, when at the polls. 

Have these rights been maintained in our country, or have they 
not? Occasionally we have had riots here and there, by which 
ballot boxes have been destroyed or taken possession of, and 
by armed or violent intervention, citizens have been prevented 
from voting according to their choice. Most of these occur- 
rences have taken place in some of the large cities. But far 
the most extensive riots that have ever occurred of this kind in 
the country, took place at the election in the territory of 
Kansas, on the thirtieth of March, 1855, by which, there is no 
room for doubt, that in many places acts of the most shameful 
violence were committed, and, probably, the grand result was 
effected thereby. All these cases of riots at elections, however, 
are but individual instances, and have not been so wide spread 
and general as to effect seriously the stability of our institu- 
tions. 

There is one species of restraint, however, by acts of 
violence over the elective franchise, that became general through- 



24 A Solution of Our National Difficulties. 

out most of the Sltive States for several years previous to the 
breaking out of the Rebellion, and was of such character and 
extent, as necessarily to impede the operations of our Republi- 
can principles, and effect materially the stability of the 
Government. This was the custom of preventing Abolitionists 
from making nominations and from voting for the candidates of 
their own choice in the Slave "States. Without assuming to 
decide any thing either in favor of or against the principles of 
these Abolitionists or Republicans, (by whatever name they 
mav be called,) one thing is certain, and that is, whether their 
principles are right or wrong, they had the same right to sus- 
tain them at the ballot box, as any other citizens had to sustain 
theirs. 

Corrupting hij fear of Insurrection. 

According to the first principles in the science of govern- 
ment, there must, in all governments, be a sovereign power. 
This sovereign power is lodged in different places, according to 
the form of government. Sometimes it is placed in the hands of 
one class, and sometimes in the hands of another ; sometimes 
it is lodged with one man, at others with many ; sometimes its 
locality is determined by hereditary succession, at others by 
flection ; and sometimes it is in part elective and in part here- 
ditary. But under all these forms, and every other, the sove- 
reign power must be the controlling power, otherwise it is not 
sovefeign, and is not the government. 

It is perfectly consistent with the character of the sovereignty 
of the country to allow itself to be petitioned and remonstrated 
or reasoned with, but when it comes to matters of force, it 
must prove itself the strong prevailing power. And if it 
•yields in the least to intimidation or threat, this is precisely the 
same thing in -effect, as though it Avere already subjugated ; and 
in f^ict this is subjugation. By its yielding, it acknowledges 
its own imbecility, and the superiority of some other power 
within its own jurisdiction. One yielding is an invitation to 
another threat, until threats very soon become the order of the 
day ; they multiply on every hand ; the language of rebellion 
becomes as common as any other : and whatever the govern- 
ment attempts to do, it is insultingly, and continually cautioned 
of the pi;ecariousness of its own existence and power. 

This same principle runs through all government. In school 
or college government, it is the same. No common school 
teacher can suffer himself to be intimidated into a departure 
from his own rules and regulations in a single instance, without 
losing the control of his school. The teacher may be mild 
in his government, listen to the wants and wishes of his pupils, 



A Solution of Our National Difficulties. 25 

and even sport with them, all perfectly consistent with his dig- 
nity and authority. But in any issue of power or authority, 
that any of them may make, or threaten to make with him, in 
the regulations of his school, he must prevail, or his authority 
and usefulness in that school are at an end ; and it matters not 
whether he, or they, are right in the particular thing concern- 
ing Avhich the issue is made. If any of us should go into a 
school, and hear the teacher threatened on every hand with re- 
sistance, in case he should attempt this, that, or the other, we 
would say at once, he is no governor there, and is powerless to 
fulfill the objects of his employment. Precisely so, it is, with 
all government, including State and National. In every case 
the government must be the strong controling power, sustaining 
itself far above all contempts or menaces arising within its ju- 
risdiction. 

The sovereign power of a country has no right to yield to 
its motives of fear from menaces of domestic resistance ; and 
if it does so, it acts unworthy of its high trust. Such yielding 
is but the prelude to anarchy and public dangeV, and the gov- 
ernment that does it, commits a great wrong upon the country 
of its jurisdiction, and upon each of its citizens. Every citizen 
has a claim upon the clear judgment of the sovereignty, unbi- 
ased by motives of fear or favor, upon the pure questions of 
justice, of sound policy and of constitutional law. No govern- 
ment has any right to be moved by any other considerations 
than these, and it is highly criminal, on the part of any citizen, 
to attempt to influence it by any other motives. No other in- 
fluences or motives can be justified by any circumstances of 
real danger from domestic violence, for if there be danger of 
this kind,, it will not be diminished by any manifestation of fear 
on the part of the government, but quite the contrary. 

Now, in this country, if indeed we have any sovereign power 
at all, it is with the people. Every voter bears in his own 
person a share of the sovereignty, and the mode of exercising 
his sovereign power is by his vote. To intimidate a voter, then, 
is to intimidate, in some measure, the sovereign power of the 
country. To say to a voter, that in case this or that be done 
in political or govermental affairs there will be insurrection, 
rebellion or disunion, and to say this with a view to influence 
a voter in the casting of his vote, is the very worst mode of 
corrupting elections. And if the voter yield to this influence, 
he acts upon principles as base as the corrupter himself. 

What shall we say then of the man who stands up before an 
assembly of the sovereign people and tells them that he is a 
Democrat or Republican in principle, believes in the right and 
practicability of government based upon the will -of the major- 

3 



26 A Solution of Oar National Difficulties. 

ity, and then, in the same address, tells them that if the major- 
ity determine thus or so, their authority will be put at defiance 
and overthrown ? Are not his doctrines and teachings in plain 
conflict with themselves ? How much of consistency can be 
accredited to the man who tells the assembled masses of the 
people that he has great confidence in their intelligence and 
integrity, and then, at the same time, tells them that these 
endowments of theirs are to be held subordinate to that base, 
cowardly fear, that is to be inspired by those Avho dare to talk 
flippantly about resistance, secession, disunion, or separation of 
the East from the West, and the North from the South. What 
is such a man but a wholesale corrupter of elections? And 
yet, strange to say, a very large share of the electioneering 
capital of the entire nation, for the last forty years, has consisted 
of this very stuff; and stranger still, hundreds of thousands of 
us have been influenced by it in our votes. 

No wonder the sovereignty of this country has become con- 
temptible and weak in the estimation of its enemies, when its 
friends thus acknowledge its imbecility. The people of this 
country owe nothing to the men who meditate rebellion. They 
owe everything to their own united and determined action in 
support of their own Government and laws; and this united 
action, while it continues, is fully sufficient to carry them tri- 
umphantly through every contest of domestic violence. 

What is right? What is Avrong? What is constitutional? 
What is unconstitutional ? These are the only questions with 
which the voter has to do in the determination of his vote. 
With these soundings of alarm of danger to the Union, he has 
nothing to do, further than to inquire from whence their origin, 
and who it is that dares to meditate resistance to that mighty 
sovereign power, a portion of which he bears in his own person. 

One thing we should not fail to observe in reference to these 
alarmists about disunion. They seldom acknowledge any de- 
sign on the part of themselves to engage in rebellion ; not 
they, but it is somebody else ; and this somebody else is alluded 
to in terms so indefinite as to leave it altogether uncertain who 
is meant. Now if there is any danger to the Union, then some- 
body meditates rebellion ; and whenever this alarm is sounded, 
we should lose no time in demanding of the alarmist what his 
authority is for giving it, and who the evil designer is ; and if 
he fails to give satisfactory answer to these inquiries, we should 
hold him as the culprit, or one of the culprits, in whose heart 
dwells the foul, sacrilegious purpose of raising violent hands 
against the sovereignty of this free Government. 

We have now seen that in two ways the purity of elections 
h?is been to a great extent taken away in this country : first by 



A Solution of Our National Difficulties. 27 

deriA'ing to the i:)eoplc of anti-slavery sentiment the privilege 
of the free elective franchise in the Slave States, and second, by 
the influence of fear upon the citizens, everywhere, for the 
safety of the Union and Government. Whilst these are the 
only means by which the purity of elections has heretofore 
been so far destroyed as to effect materially the stability of the 
Government, we should do great injustice to the subject if we 
should leave the impression that they are the only means by 
■which the same can be done. No doubt new modes will be re- 
sorted to, from time to time, for accomplishing the same end, 
conforming ever to the points where the people are least watch- 
ful of danger, thus impressing our minds, ever afresh, with the 
truthfulness of the adage, that "eternal vigilance is the price 
of liberty." 

Having now seen that the foundation of the Government has 
long since been removed, so far as it was constituted of the 
first and second great fundamental laws, to wit, the freedom of 
speech and the purity of elections, we now pass to an examin- 
ation of the third and last one of those laws, namely, the sov- 
ereignty of the majority. 

SOVEREIGNTY OP THE MAJORITY. 
What it Is. 

Sovereignty means supreme power, majority means more 
than half; literally, then, the Sovereignty of the Majority 
means the supreme power of that part of the citizens, consti- 
tuting more than half of their whole number. Now it is sel- 
dom that more than half of the voters of the United States, or 
of any State, can agree fully in regard to any thing, and this 
gives rise to the necessity of taking the word majority in this 
connection in a qualified sense ; and under some circumstances 
the will of a less number than the absolute majority is taken 
as the will of the majority. This is what is properly called the 
constitutional majority, and arises from unavoidable necessity 
in the application of the principles of republican government 
in practice. 

In the election of ofiicers it is rare that the first choice of 
the majority of voters rests upon any one man. Hence, 
usually, the candidate having the highest number of votes is 
deemed to be elected, Avhether his number of votes be a 
majority of all or less. 

Where there are a large number of candidates, it is plain, that 
in this manner, one might possibly be elected by a small vote,wlio 
would be quite unfit for the trust. For this reason the Consti- 
tution requires that in the election of the ofiicer of the highest 



28 A Solution of Our National Difficulties. 

importance, (the President), a diflferent and more precautionary 
method be followed. This officer is chosen by electors, who arc 
themselves elected by the people : and a majority of all these 
electors is required to make the choice. And if no candidate 
receives the vote of such majority, then the House of Repre- 
sentatives, the members of which are elected by the people, are 
to choose the President from the three candidates having the 
highest number of electoral votes, the representation of each 
State being entitled to one vote only, and the votes of a major- 
ity of all the States being necessary to a choice. And in choos- 
ing the Vice President, who is the President's alternate, a 
similar precautionary method is adopted. 

■ Now it is very clear that whatever expedients are resorted 
to in the election of any officer, there is absolutely no will of 
the majority generally in the matter ; for it seldom happens 
that the will of the majority accords in favor of any one can- 
didate. Even in those cases where a majority of the votes are 
cast for some one candidate, there is usually no such accordance; 
but the vote is cast by virtue of the party nomination. 

And again, if we had no laws except those that are accorded 
to us by the absolute will of the majority, we should have but 
few laws ; for it is seldom that any law is passed, that is pre- 
cisely in accordance with the will of a majority of all the peo- 
ple, or even of the legislative body that passes it. In the first 
place, the will of the people cannot be taken directly in the 
passage of laws, but it must be done through the medium of 
those elected by them, which is an imperfect mode of represen- 
tation, though the very best that can be adopted. 

Every act of Congress, every proclamation of the President, 
every order given, or regulation prescribed by him, or by any 
one of his ten thousand subordinates, every decision of the 
Supreme Court of the United States, is a law; and by the 
theory of our Government, each and every one of these laws 
is founded upon the will of the people ; and yet not one-tenth 
of the questions involved in the expediency of these laws are 
ever presented to the minds of the peop|e at all, prior to the 
election of the officials by whom the same are adopted. New 
and unlocked for exigencies, questions and subjects of moment- 
ous consequence, often arise during a term of office, upon 
which the official must act, without the means of consulting the 
iudgment of a majority of his constituents, and, in some cases, 
with but little time to cnnsult his own. 

The Judges of the Supreme Court of the United States, arc 
not elected by the people, but are nominated by the President, 
and confirmed by the United States Senate. And when so 
chosen, they hold their offices for life. Thus the laws given by 



A Solution of Our National Difficulties. 29 

the Supreme Court, are often founded on the will of the majori- 
ty of a former generation, if indeed they may be said to be 
founded upon the will of a majority at all. We sec, then, how 
imperfect our representative system is, throughout, in express- 
ing the will of the majority. 

But even if the representative system were perfect, and 
each and every official were a perfect exponent of the senti- 
ments of the majority of his constituents, yet in matters of le- 
gislation, it is impossible to make the absolute will of the ma- 
jority any guide at all, for the reason that it often happens, and 
probably oftener than otherwise, that the majority of the legis- 
lative body does not accord or agree in respect to the laws that 
are passed by it. It not unfrequently happens, that a law is 
passed by a legislative body, that is so far from being approv- 
ed by a majority of its members in every one of its provisions, 
that it has not such approval of a single member. Every one 
takes some exception to it, but the exception taken \)y one is not 
the exception taken by another, and a majority do not concur 
in the taking of any one exception, and hence each and every 
member, of that majority by whom it is passed, vote for it, not 
because it meets his approval altogether, but simply because he 
deems it better than to pass the subject over without action. 

We see, then, that imperfection characterizes this our system 
of representation and majorities, in all its parts. But it can- 
not be otherwise. The absolute will of the majority, as a rule 
of action, in the selection of officers, and in the making and 
unmaking of laws, is a thing utterly unattainable. Hence 
by the Constitutions of the United States and the several States, 
or most of them, a system is adopted that probably approximates 
as near to perfection as is practicable, and by which is adopted 
what may be called the constitutional majority. This system 
may not be as perfect as it might be. But surely, to say the 
least of it, it approximates so near to the greatest attainable 
degree of perfection, that any failure or difficulties in the suc- 
cess of our institutions, cannot be attributed to this imperfec- 
tion, and hence no occasion arises here, for any objection to the 
doctrine of " the Constitution as it is, and the Union as it was." 

Sanctity' of all Laivs. 

Notwithstanding some of our laws are approved by the abso- 
lute majority of the people, and some by the constitutional ma- 
jority only, there can be no distinction between laws, in respect 
to authority, sanctity, or inviolability. The whole system of 
laws is bound together in such manner that all must stand or 
fall together. It is utterly impossible to administer those tliat 
are approved by the absolute majority of the people, without 



80 A Solution of Our National Difficulties. 

also administering tliosc that are approved by the constitutional 
majority only. To neglect one of these, is to neglect the other, 
and to oppose one, is to oppose the other. If it be anti-repub- 
lican to oppose the one, it is equally anti-republican to oppose 
the other. 

And so in respect to the relative authority of the laws ema- 
nating from the different branches of the Government. It will 
not do to say that a decision of the Supreme Court of the 
United States, or an order or proclamation of the President, is 
of less authority than an act of Congress. The executive, le- 
gislative, and judicial branches of the Government are all de- 
pendent upon each other; and to trample upon the authority of 
one of these, is to trample upon the authority of the whole. 
To weaken one, is to weaken the whole. Much has been said 
in this country of the danger of encroachment of one branch 
of the Government upon another. But in a country like ours, 
where all three branches of the Government are under the con- 
trol of one sovereign power of the people, this is the least of 
all our dangers, if indeed it ma}'' be said to be any danger at 
all. The great danger with us, is, that we do not yield suffi- 
cient obedience and support to any branch of the Government. 

The truth is, we have never sufficiently learned the impor- 
tance of adhering to the inviolability of our own laws. We 
ought to understand that to trample upon any law, however 
unimportant in itself, that has been adopted under the authority 
of the Constitution, is to trample upon the Constitution itself. 
The laws are dependent upon the Constitution, and the Consti- 
tution upon the enforcement of the laws. All our laws, good 
and bad, great and small. State and national, primary and sec- 
ondary, executive^ legislative and judicial, are bound together 
by one grand chain of dependence ; and it is impossible that 
one jot or tittle in any wise fail, without affecting the whole. 

Our laws not only have a mutual dependence, pe?- se, among&t 
themselves, but they all emanate from one great authority, 
namely the people, and to call in question the authority of one, 
is to call in question the authority of the whole. No good 
man can say of a bad law, that it is bad, and therefore I will 
not regard it, nor of any unconstitutional law, that it is uncon- 
stitutional, and therefore I will not regard it, nor of a needless 
law, that it is needless, and therefore I will not regard it, with- 
out setting an example before bad men, to do and say precisely 
the same things in respect to those laws that are good, con- 
stitutional and needful. Every truly loyal and good man, will 
yield ready and cheerful obedience to all laws. If any of 
them are bad, unnecessary or unconstitutional, in his judgment, 
ho will seek by the constitutional and lawful mode to have them 



A Solution of Our National Difficulties. 31 

abrogated ; but lie ■will set up no independent judiciary of his 
own, to deteruaine them unconstitutional, nor countenance any 
disobedience or resistance on the part of others. 

How different from this are everywhere our customs and 
practices. It is true in many instances we manifest great zeal 
in support of the laws ; but this is often more from the force 
of our own inclination in the particular instance, than from any 
reverence for the laws. 

To illustrate our meaning, let us take a single instance. Sup- 
pose we go into the State of Ohio, the society of good order 
and republican principles. We find here written upon the 
statute book of the State, " that it shall be unlawful for any 
person or persons, by agent or otherwise, to sell, in any quan- 
tity, intoxicating liquors to be drank in, upon, or about the 
building or premises where sold," and that if any person shall 
offend against the provisions of this law, such person shall be 
punished by certain fine and imprisonment. For nine years 
this law has stood upon the statute book of that State, plainly 
written, and well known to every person in it, as the clear, set- 
tled will of the majority ; yet, if we go into almost any village 
in the State, we can easily find one or more places where this 
law is violated a hundred times a day, and that, too, by the 
countenance and assistance of a hundred different men in buy- 
ing, for the purpose for which the law forbids any sale to be 
made. Now, although it is true, no one but the seller incurs 
the penalty of the law, yet every one who buys under such 
circumstances, countenances and aids in the violation, and man- 
ifests the same disregard for the sanctity of the law as the sel- 
ler himself. And this is a common practice throughout nearly 
all parts of the State; the persistent determination to violate 
the law being so general and so great as to baffle all efforts of 
the friends of the law for its enforcement. 

Now the men who manifest such contempt for the law, call 
themselves Republicans and Democrats. But are they so? 
What is a Republican but one who believes in the right and 
authority of the majority to prescribe laws for the government 
of the whole, and maintains this principle by his influence and 
example? And what else than this is a Democrat? If we 
would maintain a Republican or Democratic Government here, 
we must maintain the sovereignty of the majority: or, in other 
words, we must maintain our own laws, and in this, make no 
compromises with our own individual or collective inclinations 
or tastes. 

There are in almost every State, sundry laws, like this Ohio 
liquor law, lying almost a dead letter upon the statute book, 
although plainly the expressed and settled will of the majority. 



32 A Solution of Our National Difficulties. 

The spirit that actuates those men who persistently violate 
them, is the spirit of lawlessness, constituting the germ of 
insurrection, rebellion and anarchy. And this spirit is not 
confined to the dominions of Slavery ; it is everywhere, East and 
West, and North and South ; it is in our midst, and in our very 
hearts. Everywhere, and in everything, it intrudes itself, and 
strives for the mastery. It is the spirit of anti-republicanism, 
against which we must wage a perpetual warfare, offensive and 
defensive. And the strong -weapons of our warfare are not so 
much the organization of parties, with hallowed names, and the 
promulgation of rigmarole platforms and resolutions, as in 
clearly understanding a fcAV plain elementary principles, and 
applying these in everything we say and do. 

Compromises. 

Anarchy and despotism are two opposite extremes, equally 
to be avoided and guarded against. In all republics there is a 
time for the people to direct the Government, and a time for 
the Government to direct the people. The people's time is at 
the election, that of the Government afterward. Between 
elections the people should carefully study, and freely discuss, 
the acts of their Government and its officers; but at the same 
time they should attempt no direction or control. The reason 
of this is, because at the election is the only tin:ie when the 
voice of the sovereign majority can be distinguished from that 
of the minority. 

Now we must advert again to the elementary principle in 
the science of government, that in every government, no dif- 
ference what its form or kind, there must be a controlling power. 
What has already been said upon this cardinal subject, on 
pages 24 and 25 of this solution, applies here] in full force, 
and it would be well for the reader to turn back, before pro- 
ceeding any further in the perusal of this work, and refresh 
his mind once more with a clear view of the nature and neces- 
sity of this great principle as there set forth. 

Where there is no controlling power, there is no Govern- 
ment ; and where there is a controlling power, chat power con- 
stitutes the Government. There is no exception to this princi- 
ple. Go where we wull, into any association or organization of 
mankind, or, if you please, into the regions of the damned, or 
into the society of just men made perfect, and everywhere we 
shall find that the principle holds true. There never was an 
exception to it, and never can be. Republics form no excep- 
tion to it ; but on the contrary, the principle holds as true in 
regard to these, as in regard to governments of any other 
form. Republics differ from other governments, not in the 



A Solution of Our Kalional Difficulties. 33 

essential principle of sovereign power, but in the locality or 
lodgement of the powers 

There can he, in the very nature of thinijs, but one control- 
ling power at the same time over the same jurisdiction, and in 
respect to the same subjects of government. There maybe 
two powers existing at ihe same time, each assenting to what 
is done by the other ; or if differing in anything, yet not essen- 
tially so, and thus for years, harmony and pros})erity be pre- 
served under the reign of the two. But when circumstances 
arise bringing these powers into collision, when the test comes, 
which surely will come sooner or later, that is to determine 
whether of the two is to abandon the great essential principles 
constituting the basis of its existence and authority, then will 
be seen which of these powers really constitutes the goverment; 
which of them is really sovereign, and which subordinate ; 
which of them it is that really exists by virtue of its own pow- 
ers of self-preservation, and which exists by the sufferance of 
the other. 

In the United States, we flatter ourselves that we have a 
Republican Government. If this really be so, then the will 
of the constitutional majority is sovereign amongst us, in all 
matters of national concern. And if the will of the constitu- 
tional majority be sovereign, then the will of no constitutional 
minority is or can be sovereign; but in any and every issue or 
conflict, between the constitutional majority and the constitu- 
tional minority, the former will and must prevail. This is the 
very test of republican institutions. 

Now suppose a national election has taken place, and a Con- 
gress assembles, representing the will of the constitutional 
majority, in favor of the adoption of a certain measure. The 
measure is brought before Congress in the form of a bill ; and 
it is ascertained, and becomes notorious everywhere, that there 
is a clear majority of each House in its favor, and that the 
President is ready to approve it. But. during its pendency the 
minority bring forward and propose some modification. The 
measure and its modification are Ijoth discussed long and thor- 
oughly. The majority are inflexible in their judgment, and are 
still bent upon the passage of their measure. But, as a last resort, 
the minority say, if their modificaton is not accepted, it will 
result in the dissolution of the Union; and by this means a 
sufficient number of those favorable to the original measure, are 
influenced to vote for the modification, to secure its passage 
into a law, and defeat the original bill. Now where is the sov- 
ereignt}'- of our majority? It is no more. It is gone ; subdued; 
subjugated. Tiie will of the majority is no longer sovereign, 
but subordinate. Once it has been menaced into obedience to 



34 A Solution of Our National Difficulties. 

the -will of the minority ; and Avhat has been done once, can bo 
done again, and again, and as often as the minority see fit to 
present the same alternative. Where now is our republic? Its 
great essential principle is taken away. And yet this is com- 
promise. Precisely the kind of compromise that was introduced 
into the legislation of the country a little more than forty years 
ago, upon the plea of saving the Union. Never was there a 
greater error, or one followed by cosequences more deplorable. 

There have been three compromises in our country, each of 
which was effected in the manner above stated. And although 
the historian may not have stated in this same lioht the origin 
of tbe acts of Congress constituting these several compromises, 
yet they were all originated substantially upon the principle 
above stated ; that is, for the purpose of saving the Government 
and Union by concilliating those who had become disaffected. 
It is by no means every compromise that has any thing dan- 
gerous or objectional about it. Compromises of some kinds 
are very common and necessary in the business of legislation. 
It is only against those that are entered into for the purpose of 
saving the Government or Union by concilliation that we here 
raise any objection. 

In 1820 there Avas a majority in Congress, who, according to 
their own judgment, were favorable to admitting the State of 
Missouri into the Union in no manner except as a free State. 
But for the purpose of saving the Union and preserving the 
peace, is was agreed that it might be admitted as a slave State, 
with the condition annexed that all other territory belonging to 
the Louisiana province, and north of the parallel of 36 degrees 
and 30 minutes, should be forever free. This was the first 
time in the history of the country that the majority made hum- 
ble obeisance to the minority ; the influence of which obeisance 
upon the morals of the whole nation has been plainly felt from 
that time to the present. 

Hence it is that we hear so much cautioning about the safety 
of the Union, which means precisely this : that the majority 
must be exceedingly cautious what they do, otherwise the mi- 
nority will resist and overthrow their authority. And this 
same humble respect for the wishes of the minority, we are 
told, must be our leading motive, tempering our action in every 
thing we say and do. Our own opinions of right and of wrong, 
of constitutional law and of sound policy, are of some little 
importance, it is admitted, in determining our action ; but when 
the Union is in danger, that is, when the minority threaten ic, 
then it is said Ave must throw aside our own opinions, and con- 
form to their every demand in order to save it. This kind of 
teaching is directly antagonistic to republican or democratic 
principle. 



A Solution of Our National Difficulties. 35 

Again in 1833 the second compromise to save the Union 
took place. The tariff upon some articles of importation, as 
established by the majority, was too high to suit the best inter- 
ests and wishes of the minority, and a portion of this minority, 
the people of South Carolina, placed themselves in an attitude 
of resistance, and declared themselves absolved from further 
association in the Union, in case any effort should be made to 
enforce the tariff, laws as then existing, amongst them ; and 
many others, also, in other States, deeply sympathized with 
them, and stood ready to aid the insurgents so soon as the issue 
should be brought to the test of military force. There were two 
plans proposed, for meeting this extraordinary exigency, by the 
Government. The first was from Andrew Jackson, then Pres- 
ident of the United States ; which was, to enforce the laws at 
every hazard and cost. The second was from Henry Clay, 
then a member of the United States Senate ; which was, to 
concilliate the disaffection by a gradual reduction of the tariff. 

Unless the writer of this solution has reasoned Avholly in 
vain, the plan proposed by President Jackson was right, and 
that of Senator Clay, radically wrong. The first was founded 
upon republican principles, was calculated to promote public 
confidence, public security, public morals, and the stability of 
our noble Government. The second was anti-republican, and 
naturally tending to demoralization, to anarchy, insecurity, and 
the instability not only of the Government, but of every inter- 
est, public and private. 

We do not pretend to say whether the tariff itself was right 
or wrong, nor does it matter a whit, when the great essential 
principle of the sovereignty of the majority was put in jeop- 
ardy. And it is a most singular fact, worthy of note, and very 
instructive with all, that the great leader in this doctrine of 
enforcement was the chief representative of the free trade 
policy ; whilst the author of the compromise reduction, was none 
other than the champion of high protective tariff. 

In 1850 there was a third compromise. Tiie Territory of 
California applied to be admitted as a free State into the Union ; 
there was a majority of each House in Congress favorable, upon 
principle, to her admission in this manner ; but it must not be 
done without a compromise, otherwise the Union was again to 
be destroyed. And a compromise ensued. California was ad- 
mitted as a free State, but as a consideration for this the North- 
ern people accepted the present fugitive slave law, and the 
abandonment of their part of the benefit under the Missouri 
compromise ; or at least such, Avas the construction afterward 
given to this last compromise, as to result in such abandonment. 
And now for the third time, as was supposed, all vexed, dan- 



3G A Solution of Our National Difficulties. 

gerous questions being fully and finally settled, the Uiiion was 
forever established, upon the unchangeable principles of con- 
cilliatioij and friendship, beyond the power of any disturbing 
element again to bring it into peril. 

But alas ! Only ten years more transpire, and the dangers 
appear as great as ever, and greater. In the election of Mr. 
Buchanan, the Northern Democracy now feel that they have 
been betrayed ; and there are some matters of principle con- 
nected with the government of the Territories upon which they 
desire to have a better understanding w^ith their Southern 
brethren, and without which understanding, they feel that there 
is no chance of success of the great National Democratic Party 
in the presidential contest into which the country is about to 
enter. These things are stated by Northern Democrats in their 
national convention at Charleston ; but it is all in vain. Forty 
years before, the Southern Statesman had assumed that the 
union of these States was a thing in their hands, to be disposed 
of at pleasure ; and this assumption had been recognized and 
conceded in three several acts of Congress. And now how 
could they themselves doubt the tact. 

Never before in the history of the country had circumstances 
been so favorable for successfully testing the reality of the 
thing which had been so long only assumed and recog- 
nized in both the Government and politics of the country. 
Never before had these southern politicians their iron heel so 
completely upon the neck of free speech, and of course never 
before did they hold such complete sway over the blind passions 
of their own masses, to arouse them at pleasure, beyond the 
power of Government, or the Northern people to interfere. 
The administration of Mr. Buchanan, without his design it may 
be, had been an instrument in their hands for shaping events to 
suit their purpose of disunion. Should an administration now 
intervene, not ruled by their counsels, whether Democratic or 
otherwise, the favored moment would be lost. 

Southern politicians could no longer rule the country by de- 
ception. As a last resort, therefore, they said plainly to their 
northern brethren in convention, give us slavery protection in all 
the territories, beyond interference by territorial or other au- 
thority, and we will then be content, but not otherwise. The 
reply was, we cannot thus eat our own words at the north, and 
our people will not sustain us if we do ; and the result will be 
a grand defeat of the National Democratic party. It was then 
and there that the great National Democratic party, and the 
great nation itself, ceased alike to answer any purpose for 
southern politicians, and they determined on destroying both. 
Those of them having the authority to speak, so declared, in 
the private councils of the convention. 



A Solution of Oiw National Difficulties. 87 

Notliing was being lost, however, in the Avay of preparation, 
whilst Mr, Buchanan was President, especially so long as these 
southern men coukl deceive that functionary, in reference to 
their real purposes, and tlic mutual friendly relation that had 
long existed between him and them enabled them easily to do 
this. They could have no objection, therefore, for the time 
being, to put on the semblance of loyalty, go through the forms 
of another presidential election, and perchance throw the elec- 
tion into the House of Representatives, and there, by some 
bargain, secure the candidate of their own choice. But even 
in this event, there was no intention on their part of remaining 
in the Union, but on the contrary, the only object they had in 
securing a president, was to enable them the more easily to get 
out of it ; for they could no longer hope to control the legisla- 
tive branch of the Government, and their power within the 
Union, to rule the Government upon their own principles, Avas 
essentially broken. 

Countrymen : these compromises to save the Union, are a 
terrible delusion. The present awful sufferings and slaughter, 
and bereavement, are the fruits, in part, of those same compro- 
mises. The Constitution establishes one great compromise to 
which alone we can adhere with safety. This compromise is a 
very simple one, easy to be understood, and above every other, 
it is pre-eminently just and right. It is simply this: the will 
of the majority is the km. Every other compromise that can 
possibly be suggested comes in direct conflict with this, and 
tends to the destruction of both the Constitution and the Union. 
The man who is not satisfied to abide by this compromise under 
all circumstances, and in its application to every thino-, but 
seeks to set it aside or evade it, in its application to some thino-s, 
is an enemy alike to the Constitution and the Union, and should 
not be entrusted with any political power, not even the right 
to vote. Such a man may deceive himself, and perhaps honest- 
ly think that he is a friend to the Union ; but his acts will tend 
to evil none the less for all that. 

WE HAVE ABANDONED THE EXPERIMENT OF OUR FATHERS. 

At the beginning of this chapter, its purpose was stated to 
be, the finding out of the cause of our present national difiicul- 
ties. And the result of our investigation is simply this, we 
find we have departed from all the first principles of the govern- 
ment as instituted by the Fathers. Our national free speech, 
the purity of our national elections, and the sovereignty of our 
national majority, have all been abandoned long since. 

A huge wall of separation has been raised for more than fif- 
teen years between the northern and southern sections of the 



38 A Solution of Our National Difficulties, 

country, prohibiting free discussion entirely. In one-half of 
the Confederacy, people holding the sentiments of the majority 
of those in the other half, are not permitted to vote at all ac- 
cording to the dictates of their own judgments, and have not 
been for the last fifteen years at least. At every returning 
election, the sovereign people are every -where and constantly 
told that they must not decide thus and so by their votes, or 
the Union ^yill be destroyed. And when the election is over, 
and the people's representatives assemble in Congress to legis- 
late for the country, these also are constantly told that they 
must not legislate thus and so, or the Union will be destroyed. 
And the President also, who is one of the chief representatives 
of the people, is constantly threatened with resistance if he 
attempts to do this, or that, or the other. These threats of resist- 
ance, and dissolution, constitute the basis of every compromise, 
and for a long time have been the chief argument, if argu- 
ment it can be called, by which the destinies of the country 
have been controlled. 

Now these things all show nothing else than a state of utter 
political demoralization, totally destructive of the first princi- 
ples of the Government, and if it be not anarchy itself, it is the 
sure prelude to it. No wonder that we are involved in difficul- 
ties. These calamities that are now upon us are no eviden- 
ces against the experiment of the Fathers, for we have not 
been trying their experiment for many years. We have no 
evidence as yet that the foundation of the Government, as laid 
by the Fathers, is bad, or unworthy of our full confidence, for 
we have not been building upon that foundation, but upon some- 
thing else, or, perhaps more properly speaking, upon nothing 
at all. True we have all the time had the semblance of repub- 
lican government. We have had the form, and a mixture of 
the principles. But this will not do. If we w^ould give fair 
trial to the practicability of republican government, we must 
build wholly upon republican principles, and discard everything 
else. We all know how vain a thing it is to erect a building, 
one-half upon the rock, and the other half upon the sand. Far 
better to place it wholly upon the sand, and far better still, to 
place it wholly upon the rock. 

It is not slavery that has brought upon us these difficulties ; 
nor is it the tariff; or any question growing out of either of 
these, or any other difficult question whatever. In the absence 
of the issues heretofore presented, others would have arisen 
equally difficult and distracting in their nature. It is for the 
want of free speech, purity of elections, and the sovereignty 
of the majority, that Ave are visited by these calamities. With- 
out these fundamental principles, as a basis of operations in a 



A Solution of Our Nallonal Difficulies. 39 

republic, the plainest questions become difficult ; and those 
whose interests are one, are made to hate each other Avith 
deadly hate ; and, with a will, to pour out each other's blood 
like water, without the slightest cause. But let these funda- 
mental principles be restored, then, although we shall have 
seasons of political excitement, yet there will be no ])lood shed; 
although we shall have difficult and distracting questions to dis- 
pose of, yet the intelligence and patriotism of the people Avill 
be fully sufficient for the task, of doing this, and doing it too, 
upon the principles of substantial justice and sound policy. 
And those who do not believe this, do not believe in the prac- 
ticability of republican government. 



40 A Solution of Our Nalmial Difficulties. 



CIIAPTEE III. 

THE REMEDY FOR OUR NATIONAL DIFFICULTIES. 

THE FOUNDATION OP THE GOVERNMENT MUST BE RESTORED. 

The cause of our National difficulties is the removal of the 
foundation of the Government; and the only remedy is to 
i-estore that foundation. Something more than eighteen hun- 
dred years ago, one spake as never man spoke, and said, that 
a certain ''wise man built his house upon a rock ; and the rain 
descended, and the floods came, and the winds blcAv and beat 
upon that house, and it fell not, for it was founded upon a 
rock." And there was ''a foolish man which built his house 
upon the sand ; and the rain descended, and the floods came, 
and the winds blew and beat upon that house, and it fell — and 
great was the fall of it." 

Now, the political and social elements, like the material, 
must have their conflicts. There must ever be storms of 
political excitement, from time to time, and there is no help 
for it. In f;ict, these are indispensably necessary for the puri- 
fication of our political atmosphere ; and to attempt to prevent 
them is worse than idle. But one thing we can do. We can 
adopt the course of the wise man in the parable, and secure 
well the foundation of our building ; and then let the storms 
come — they will do us no harm. Let us have uninterrupted 
freedom of speech, purity of elections, and the sovereignty of 
the majority, and then, whaiever may betide us, all will be 
well. 

Before the foundation of the Government can be fully and 
permanently restored, there are a few things that the people 
must do, and a few others that the Government must do. And 
these duties, respectively incumbent upon the people and the 
governmc t ..we will now consider separately. 

WIIxVT THE PEOPLE SHOULD DO. 

Before we can have our republic reinstated upon its pure 
principles, we, the people, must cease to dejy;-ecate the agitation 
of political questions. We must no longer talk about the evils 
of agitating the slavery question, or of any other question. 
We must rather encourage and foster the universal agitation 
of all ([ucstions in which the people have any interest. We 
must exactly reverse our maxims in this respect. And so far 
from looking upon the agitation of any question as dangerous 



A Solution of Our National Difficulties. 41 

to our institutions, wc must understand that the very first thing 
necessary and indispensable to the preservation of our liberties 
jind our free government, is the unrestrained liberty of free 
discussion of all questions, at all times and places, and by all 
our citizens. 

The very fact that a question is exciting in its nature, shows 
that the people regard it as one of interest to them ; and the 
greater the interest, the more exciting it will be, and all the 
more necessary that the people debate it well, and come to a 
correct knowledge and a mutual understanding amongst them- 
selves upon the subject. And it is necessary that the discussion 
should be permitted to conform itself to the nature of the 
interest. If it be a question of interest between the North 
and the South, then this very fact makes it peculiarly necessary 
that between these two sections of the country its discussion 
be unrestricted. 

It is true, one may so discuss any question as to perpetrate 
an abuse of free speech, and produce a result tending to dan- 
gerous consequences. But the laws of free speech, and the 
rules concerning abuses of the same, are alike applicable to 
the discussion of all questions ; and it is worse than idle 
gibberish to talk about the dangerous character of certain 
questions. • 

And, again, we must cease to disparage our own sovereignty, 
by acting as the trumpeters of those who are incessantly 
sounding alarms of danger to the Union, and crying out for 
compromise. We must, many of us, reverse our maxims upon 
this subject also ; and instead of talking so much about saving 
the Union by compromise, we must say, the ivill of (he majority, 
it shall be enforced. We must cease, also, to aid in or coun- 
tenance those disgraceful acts of violence in the Slave States, 
whereby the purity of elections has been destroyed ; and we 
must permit each of our fellow citizens to enjoy the same right 
of voting according to the dictates of his own will and judg- 
ment, as we claim tor ourselves. 

In a word, we must, with united voice and influence, discoun- 
tenance every act, every practice and doctrine tb >'en tends 
to the destruction of free speech, purity of elections, or the 
sovereignty of the majority. Wc may differ about slavery, about 
tariffs, about banks, about internal improvement, and about every 
thing else, but about free speech, purity of elections and the 
sovereignty of the majority, there must be no difference 
amongst us, and there can be no difference amongst those who 
are truly democratic or republican in principle. 

AVIIAT THE GOVERNMENT SHOULD DO. 

Surely, we ought not to multiply our laws ; already we have 
too many and those too long and prolix. We stand in great 



42 A Solution of Our National Difficulties. 

need, liowcver, of three very simple laws, all of which 
could very properly be incorporated in one short act of Con- 
gress, and be entitled, Ait Act to i)reserve the Constiiidion and 
Union of the States. 

The first of these laws should define the freedom of speech — 
as already done in this solution — and then provide for punish- 
ment, by imprisonment in the penitentiary, of any person who 
shall hereafter do any act with intent to hinder another in the 
exercise of such freedom, or consequent upon the exercise of 
such freedom. 

The second of these laws should provide a similar punish- 
ment for any person who shall do any act of fraud or violence, 
with intent to prevent any lawful voter from voting according 
to his own choice, or consequent upon so voting, or to influence 
such person in the matter of his vote, especially in the election 
of all United States ofiicers. 

And the third of these laws should provide, that any person 
shall be punished in the same manner, (by imprisonment in 
the penitentiary,) who shall hereafter threaten, in any manner, 
either directly or indirectly, to make insurrection against the 
laws or authorities of the United States, under any circum- 
stances or in any contingency whatever ; or shall intimate or 
declare that such insurrection is likely to be made by any 
other person or persons, without at the same time stating rea- 
sonable facts upon which to base his opinion, and implicating, 
as far as he is able, those who meditate the insurrection. 

If this National Government would give to these three laws 
a national sanction, a national adjudication, and a national 
enforcement, it would effectually guard the freedom cf speech, 
the purity of elections and the sovereignty of the majority, from 
those encroachments which have been practiced heretofore, and 
be a complete remedy for all our present National difficulties ; 
and had these measures been adopted ten years ago, they 
would have saved us fi ora the dire calamities which are now 
upon us. 

CONSTITUTIONALITY OF THESE PROPOSED LAWS. 

This Government cannot be maintained without the estab- 
lishment and preservation of the freedom of speech, purity of 
elections and the sovereignty of the national majority. And 
none of these fundamental principles of the national govern- 
ment can be preserved uidess by the exercise of the powers of 
the national government for that purpose. 

Principles that lie at the foundation of the government, and 
upon which the government is dependent for its very existence, 
cannot be left at the mercy of local influences and casualities 
with any salety. And if the government of the United States 



A Solution Our National Difficulties 43 

has not itself the power to guard and maintain these funda- 
mental principles, then it has not the power of self-preserva- 
tion or self-defense. And if it has not the right of self-defense, 
to maintain its own existence against every power and influence 
tending to destroy it, (except the authority of the people acting 
in the manner prescribed by the Constitution for organic 
changes,) then it has no right to exist, and is no legitimate 
government. The very fact, then, that the government of the 
United States is a legitimate government, (which no one denies,) 
clothes it with the powers of self-defense and self-preservation : 
and without any express provision of the Constitution it would 
have full power to maintain the fundamental principles of its 
existence. 

But the framers of the Constitution have not left this power 
to rest solely upon the natural, inherent right of self-preserva- 
tion ; but by express terms the power is given in the Constitu- 
tion of the United States, as we shall discover by examination 
of that instrument. 

Before proceeding to study this Constitution, however, with 
reference to any question of power or meaning, it is necessary 
to consider one peculiar characteristic that distinguishes that 
instrument from all other Constitutional or Statutory law. 
This characteristic is its exceeding brevity. It is wonderful 
and instructive to take in hand this Constitution of the United 
States, and reflect how vast and innumerable are the rights and 
interests regulated and preserved, or intended so to be, by a 
law of so few words. In every thing we do our action is 
restrained by it ; and wherever we are, at home or abroad, on 
land or on sea, amongst our own citizens or foreigners, we are 
under its protecting ?egis. 

And these rights and interests thus protected, are not those 
of individuals only, but of communities, of States and Terri- 
tories. Nor are they confined to a few persons, but extend to 
all persons that dwell in this vast empire of freedom, compris- 
ing a large share of the finest portion of the earth, and 
absolutely unlimited in its resources. And yet this mighty 
machinery of rights and interests is regulated by a law, that, 
for extent of words, may well be compared to a drild's primer. 

This brevity of the supreme primary law, renders it easier 
to be understood by persons of ordinary education and reading, 
and its preservation is an object of great importance. Such a 
Constitution, framed by a convention of modern law makers, 
would probably contain five or ten times as many words ; and 
this constitutes one objection to the convening of any convention 
for its revision, lest, by so doing, this brevity might be to some 
extent, if not wholly, destroyed. 



44 A Solution of Our National Difficulties. 

Now, in studying this instrument, we must not expect to find 
the respective rights and duties of the government and people 
pointed out in each one of the ten thousand specific relations 
and circumstances in which they arise, but we must take the 
general terms as we find them, and by our own reflection, make 
the application ourselves. 

The preamble to the Constitution declares the objects of 
making the same in the following language: "We, the people 
of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, 
establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the 
common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the 
blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain 
and establish this Constitution for the United States of 
America." Most signally have the framers of the Constitution 
failed of all their objects, unless they have given to the National 
Government the power to guard the freedom of speech, purity 
of elections, and its own sovereignty, or in other words, the 
sovereignty of the majority. 

But they have not failed in this. - The Constitution provides 
that " Congress shall have power to provide for the common 
defense and general Avelfare of the United States."'- This 
provision confers all necessary power upon the legislative 
branch of the Government, for the purpose above mentioned. 
Nothing is plainer, than that under a republican government, 
there can be no permanent general welfare without a national 
free speech, purity of the national elections and the sovereignty 
of the national majority. Reason, as well as experience and 
observation, teach this. If the national government has not 
the power to preserve these things, then it has no power to 
provide against mutual misunderstanding, jealousies, hatred, 
revenge and civil war. And, moreover, any government, 
whether republican or otherwise, that has not the power to guard 
its own sovereignty against contempt, Avill not long have power 
to do any thing. 

Now if Congress has power to pass laws for the preservation 
of free speech, purity of elections, and the sovereignty of the 
majority, then the other two branches of the Government have 
the power, and are charged with the duty of performing their 
respective parts for their adjudication and enforcement. For 
the Constitution further ])rovides, in regard to the duties of the 
President, that "he shall take care that the laws be faithfully 
executed." 2 And in defining the powers of the judicial branch 
of the Government, it is provided, that, " The judicial power 



1 Constitution, Article I, Section 8. — First Clause. 

2 Couetitotion, Article II, Section 3. 



A Solution of Our National Difficulties. 45 

shall extend to all cases in law and equity arising under this 
Constitution, the laws of the United," &c.' 

There is still another ground of constitutionality for a national 
law, providing for the maintainnnce of free speech and for de- 
fending the purity of elections against violent restraint or 
interferance. This is the incidental power and duty that arises 
in guarding the sacred rights of personal security and of pri- 
vate property, with which the general Government is charged, 
and than which, no more responsible trust is committed to its 
hands. 

It is provided in the Constitution, that " The right of the 
people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, 
against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be viola- 
ted ;" 2 and that "ISTo person shall be held for a capital or oth- 
erwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment 
of a grand jury, * * * nor shall be compelled in any 
criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived 
of life, liberty or property, without due process of law."3 

And further, " In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall 
enjoy the right of a speedy and public trial, by an impartial 
jury, of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been 
committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained 
by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the ac- 
cusation ; to be confronted with witnesses against him ; to have 
compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to 
have the assistance of counsel for his defense."^ 

Upon careful consideration and reflection, it will be seen that 
these several provisions of the national Constitution guard three 
points of danger to the citizen. First, that his person and 
property shall not be interfered with by mobs, nor in any man- 
ner Avithout lawful authority ; second, that his person and prop- 
erty shall not be interfered with, under the forms or pretense 
of lawful authority, but without fair legal procedure ; and, 
third, that his person and propert}' shall not be interfered with, 
in any manner, however lawful and fair in the form of pro- 
cedure, for frivalous, unjust and untenable causes. Altogether, 
these provisions go t<» the full extent of securing each individ- 
ual in the enjoyment of his great natural rights — " personal 
security," "personal libert}^" and '"'private property"-^pointed 
out by Sir William Blackstone, the illustrious commentator upon 
the laws of England;'' and referred to also in the Declaration 
of Independence, as the right to "life, liberty and the pursuit 
of happiness. 

1 Coiistitulion, Articio III, Section 2. 

2 Araf-mlmeiits, Article IV. 
.T Anu-mlments, Article V. 
4 Aiut'ininn'nt8, Article VI. 

6 Blackstone's Con:montaries, Book I ; 129, 



46 A Solution of Our National Difficulties. 

Now every violation of the right of free speech involves also 
a violation of one or more of these natural, constitutional rights 
of personal security, personal liberty and private property. 
It cannot be otherwise. If a citizen be at any time or place 
prevented or hindered from the proper exercise of the freedom 
of speech, either in speaking, writing, printing or publishing 
his opinions, it must be done by a violation of the right of 
personal security, personal liberty or private property. With- 
out this there never was, and never can be, a violation of the 
right of free speech. It follows then of course, that if these 
sacred guarantees of personal security, personal liberty and 
private property, contained in the national Constitution, were 
carried out and enforced, the right of free speech would be car- 
ried out and enforced also. 

And this is also substantially true in reference to the purity 
of elections, so far as these are liable to infringement from vio- 
lent and unlawful means; that is, so far as they have been 
effected by mob violence, without any color of legal authority ; 
and these have constituted one of the leading instrumentalities 
by which the purity of elections have been destroyed, especially 
in the Southern or cotton growing States. If, then, the guar- 
antees of the Constitution Avere enforced, not only would the 
law of free speech be fully sustained, but the purity of elections 
Avould, to a very great extent, be restored and maintained ; and 
these two results would follow as a necessary and unavoidable 
consequence. 

Now the question arises, upon whom docs it devolve to carry 
out, and enforce, these guarantees of personal security, personal 
liberty and private property, found in the national Constitution? 
Most certainly, and clearly, upon the national Government, and 
upon no one else. The Constitution confers no poAvers upon 
any other Government, body politic, or corporate, or upon any 
individual or other authority except the general Government, 
to do any thing Avhatever. The compact of the Constitution 
v/as not in the least a dispensing of powers to States, Territor- 
ies, or other local organizations, nor yet to individuals ; but, on 
the contrary, it was a surrender by these of certain powers to 
one general government, for the accomplishment of certain 
objects specified in the preamble. In what plainness and sim-* 
plicity do we see this set forth, by glancing for a moment at 
the beginning of each of the three articles of the Constitution, 
establishing respectively, the legislative, executive and judicial 
branches of the Government. These are as follows : 

"ARTICLE I. Section I. All legislative powers herein 
granted, shall be vested in a Congress of the United States' 
which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives." 



A Solution of Our National Difficulties. 47 

'^VRTICLE II. Section I. The executive power shall be 
vested in a President of the United States of America." 

"ARTICLE III. Section I. The judical power of the 
United States shall be vested in one Supreme Court, and in 
such inferior Courts as the Confi;ress may from time to time 
establish." 

It is as plain, then, as the English language can make it, 
that all legislative authority created by the Constitution is ves- 
ted in Congress; all executive power is in the President, and 
all judicial, is in the Supreme Court of the United States and 
such inferior Courts as Congress may establish. 

Now every power of Government is either legislative, exec- 
utive or judicial; these constitute the summary of all Govern- 
mental authority. And when these are all given out, as is here 
done, then there remains no more power to be conferred any- 
where. Tlie Congress, the President, the Supreme Court, and 
such inferior Courts as Congress may establish, constitute the 
Government of the United States; and not a single act, great 
or small, is authorized by the Constitution to be done by any 
official, employe or other person, unless by authority of one or 
more of these three heads of Departments of the National 
Government. 

Nor is it necessary that any powers should be conferred any 
where else ; for upon these three branches of the General Gov- 
ernment, is conferred full power to enforce every guaranty 
of personal right, and every other provision contained in the 
Constitution. By the Constitution it is provided that " The 
Congress shall have power to make all laws which shall be nec- 
essary and proper for carrying into execution 5> -^ * ^11 
poAvers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the 
United States, or in any department or officer thereof;" ^ also, 
" To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws 
of the Union." ^ It is made the duty of the President to 
" preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United 
States ;" ^ and, " to take care that the laws be faithfully execu- 
ted." * and to enable him to do this, he is made " Commander- 
in-Chief of the army and navy of the United States, and of the 
militia of the several States when called into the- actual service 
of the United States."^ And further, it is provided, that, 
"the judicial power shall extend to all cases in law and equity 
arising under this Constitution," and " the laws of the United 
States." 



1 Constitution, Article I, Section 8. 

2 lb. 

3 Article II, Section 1. 

4 Article II, Section .'!. 

5 Article II, Section 2. 



48 A Solutioji of Our National Difficvlties. 

The powers, then, of the National Government for enforcing 
every provision and guarantee of the National Constitution are 
complete and ample. The Fathers are not chargeable >vith in- 
serting in this instrument guarantees of safety and protection 
to the citizen, without providing any power for tlieir enforce- 
ment, merely to deceive him, and betray him into snares fatal 
to his liberty and safety. 

How is it, then, while the National Constitution provides 
that "the right of the people to be secure in their persons, 
houses, papers and eflf.cts, against unreasonable searches and 
seizures, shall not be violated, and while the national govern- 
ment is so plainly clothed with the authority and charged with 
the duty of enforcing this guarantee, that thousands of persons, 
houses, papers and effects have been searched and i^eized, for 
no other reason than because the persons so searched or seized, 
or whose property was so searched or seized, had expressed 
opinions adverse to a certain institution of the country and 
the laws that support it, and yet no act of the general govern- 
ment put forth for redress 1 Have we not already seen, in the 
early part of this solution, that the right of free expression of 
opinion upon all the laws and institutions of the country, at all 
times, in all places and in any manner, is a right not only inherent 
in every citizen of a Republican government, but that this same 
right is the very first principle and chief corner stone of such 
government ? And can any thing then be more " unreasonable"' 
than to search or seize a citizen, or his property, because he 
exercises this sacred right? While the national Constitution 
provides that "no person shall be held to answer for a capital 
or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indict- 
ment of a grand jury," nor "be compelled in any criminal 
case to be a witness against himself;" nor be " deprived of life, 
liberty or property without due process of law ;" and that " in 
all criminal prosecutions the accused shall enjoy the right to a 
speedy and public trial by an impartial jury, ^ -^ * to be 
confronted with witnesses against him, to have compulsory 
process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the 
assistance of -counsel for his defense ;" and whilst this same 
Constitution makes it the duty of the National Government to 
enforce one and all these guarantees to the protection of every 
American citizen, it is remarkable, indeed, that this same 
government should have stood by unmoved, as though it were 
a disinterested party, with full knowledge of the fact that for 
h, long series of years each of these guarantees were being 
habitually violated in thousands of instances throughout one- 
half of the C(mfcderacy. But we all understand Avhy these 
things were done, and why they were suffered to be done. It 



A Solution of Our National Difficulties. 49 

was in order that the freedom of speech and the purit}^ of 
elections, "in every thin<^ touchinc; the institution of Slavciy in 
the Shxve States, shouhl be destroyed ; an object that could 
not possibly be accomplished while these guarantees were 
being maintained. But by their destruction the object has 
been attained most completely ; and our present difficulties and 
sufferings are but the natural fruits of this departure from the 
plain letter and spirit of the Constitution. 

By virtue of the powers surrendered by the several States, 
and by the whole people, in the formation of the national 
Constitution, it is provided that "this Constitution, and the 
laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance 
thereof, * •■'■ * shall be the supreme law of the land, and 
the judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any thing in 
the Constitution or Laws of any State to the contrary notwith- 
standing."' All that is needed, then, to pjit a stop to these 
flagrant violations of the National Constitution, is for Congress 
to enact adequate penal laws, against them, and then, when acts 
are committed in violation of thes' penal laws, the offenders 
could le prosecuted therefor in the United States Courls. And 
should any State pass laws infringing in any manner the 
guarantees of the National Constitution, every case arising io 
the State Courts for the enforcement of such laws could, if 
necessary, be reviewed in the United States Courts, and such 
judgment pronounced as to give effect to the Constitution of 
the United States and the laws enacted under it. 

There is an impression upon the minds of many, that it is 
the legitim?\te business of the general government to attend 
only to those things which pertain to the general interests of 
the whole country, and that it does not behoove the National 
Government to stoop to look after the rights of individuals. 
This is a great error. It is one of the objects of the National 
Government, as stated in the preamble of the Constitution, to 
" establish justice ;" and it is in pursuance of this object that 
the guarantees of personal rights are incorporated in the Con- 
stitution, and these guarantees are for the proteetion of all the 
people, and of each man, woman and child, constituting the 
people. 

It is the duty of the National Government to protect the 
rights of its citizens against violation by foreign powers, and, 
if need be, to engage in war for the protection of a single 
citizen. And it is under precisely the same obligation to pro- 
tect its citizens or subjects against domestic violation, as 
against foreign. The guarantees of the Constitution are 
absolute, and provide for the protection of each and all the 

1 Constitution — Article VI. 



50 A Solution of Our National Difficulties. 

people, at all times, in all places and against every violation, 
from whatever source, or under whatever pretext it may come. 
At home and abroad, on land and on sea, each and every one is 
to be secure — secure against foreign or domestic interference ; 
against violations at the hands of one or many, against State 
or United States authority ; against violations under the forms 
of law. or by infuriated mobs. To be secure, absolutely, in 
person and property, in their individual and collective capacity, 
is the right of each and all the people ; and it is the duty of 
the National Government to see that this right is everywhere, 
at all times, and at every cost and hazard, rigidly maintained. 

We do not pretend that the National Government should 
interfere for the redress of every violation of the rights of 
person or property between citizens — by no means should this 
be done. The State Governments have, or should have, full 
power to do this by virtue of their own constitutions, and it is 
much more convenient and appropriate that it should be done 
by them. But in those cases where the State Governments are 
either unwilling or unable to protect the rights of their own 
citizens, or the rights of other persons coming within their 
jurisdictions, the National Government should interpose its 
authority for this purpose, even although it should be necessary 
to do it in opposition to the power of the State Government. 

For individual protection Avithin the States, the National 
Government should only exercise its powers in those cases 
where the State Governments fail to do so. Now, aside from 
th.e incidents of war, the State Governments generally have 
enforced the rights of personal security, personal liberty and 
private property, except in those things wherein it has been 
necessary to disregard them for the purpose of destroying the 
freedom of speech and the purity of elections, and hence it is 
proper that for the present the action of the civil authorities 
of the National (xovernment should oidy be so far exercised, 
for the further protection of individual rights, as is necessary 
to reinstate these two fundamental principles of the Govern- 
ment. 

But, it will be inquired, is it the duty of the National Gov- 
ernment to stand between the authorities of a State and one or 
more of its citizens? Most assureilly it is, whenever the con- 
stitutional rights of either of these parties is violated by the 
other, and that other party is without any other redress. Each 
citizen OAves to his State Government his allegiance and support, 
and his State Government owes to him the observance and 
protection of all his personal rights. But when either of these 
parties, disregarding the obligations due to the other, with 
strong hand invades the rights of that other, then it is for the 



A Solution of Our National Difficulties. 51 

National Government to interpose its power for tlie protection 
of the weaker party. Hence these guarantees of individual 
rights in the National Constitution, one of the leading objects 
of which, was, to protect the citizen against the encroachments 
of his State Government. And hence, also, the counter pro- 
vision, in the same instrument, that " The United States sliall 
guarantee to each State a republican form of Government, and 
shall protect each of them against invasion, and on application 
of the legislature, or of the executive (when the legislature 
cannot be convened), against domestic violence." ^ 

There are certain constitutional rights and obligations exist- 
ing between each State and its citizens, between the citizens of 
each State, between the several States, between each State and 
the citizens of every other State, and between the citizens of 
different States; and high over all these, the National Govern- 
ment is established, a great supervisory power, whose duty it 
is to take cognizance of all that is done between these parties, 
to protect the weak against the strong, and to redress every 
violation of constitutional right, where redress is not otherwise 
attainable. 

NO OTHER REMEDY, THAN TO RESTORE THE FOUNDATION OF THE 

GOVERNMENT. 

There are many who think that Slavery is the great disturb- 
ing element of the country, and that if we could by any means 
get rid of this institution, nothing would any longer remain to 
endanger the Government. These persons are greatly in error. 
There is no such institution as this in Mexico ; and yet the ex- 
istence of that Republic has ever been extremely precarious, 
from domestic causes — much more so than our own. Others 
there are who think that if Slavery could be nationalized, and 
admitted without restraint or prejudice throughout all the 
States and Territories, wherever slaveholders should find it 
profitable or convenient to settle or go in transit, that the great 
cause of disaffection would be taken away, and that nothing 
would any longer mar the unity of the people, or disturb their 
Government. These persons, also, are in great error. If they will 
look candidly, into the society of the Slave States, they will 
discover there elements of discord and of disintegration that 
will surely work dismemberment amongst themselves just as 
certain as they ever become an independent people, at peace 
with the rest of the world. 

Some there are who have full faith in the virtues of some 
party to save the country, and believe that if the people would 
only give control of affairs to such party, at every succeeding 



1 Constitution, Article IV, Section 4. 



52 A Soluiion of Our National Difficulties. 

election for all time to come, that cliis would secure the perpe- 
tuity of our republic and institutions. These persons are 
greatly at variance amongst themselves, in reference to which 
party it is that possesses this peculiar virtue ; but in one re- 
spect they are all alike, being, every one of them, in great er- 
ror. Every political party that ever did exist, has been made 
up of two elements — patriotism and demagogueism. And it 
is no difficult thing to see how one of these elements may pre- 
ponderate to-day, and to-morrow the other, in any party; and 
nothing tends more to the preponderance of the latter named 
element than to keep the party continuously in power. 

Some there are Avhose whole attention is fastened upon some 
party, which they think is the great source of all mischief and 
danger, and believe that the perpetuity of the Government de- 
pends wholly upon the destruction of such party. These, also, 
are at variance amongst themselves in respect to which jmrty 
it is that should be destroyed; but are all, equally in error, in 
reference to the consequences that would follow upon the de- 
struction of either. Others there are Avho think that if the 
present rebellion can be effectually subdued, and the leaders 
made to pay the penalty of their lives, that this will be such a 
vindication of the power and practicability of our republican 
Government, as that no further dangerous attempts will be 
made against it. Of all errors that prevail, none are greater 
than this. 

The three simple remedies, already proposed, freedom of 
speech, purity of elections, and sovereignty of the majority, 
will, if adopted, save this Government and country, and impart 
prosperity to both, just as long as we continue their applica- 
tion, though it be a thousand years, or ten thousund, should the 
present order of nature continue so long. These three things 
are the instrumentalities by winch the Fathers designed every 
evil should be remedied, every error corrected, and every dif- 
ference reconciled, and they are fully adequate to these pur- 
poses. 

But without these remedies, it matters but little what may 
be done, there will be no more permanent peace and prosperity 
for us. We may abolish Slavery, or nationalize and perpetuate 
it ; call into power whatever party we may, or abolish all par- 
ties ; give the helm of State into the hands of wise men, or 
fools; good men, or bad; hold our country as one, or divide it 
in twain, or twenty; theorize and devise as we may u])on the 
policies of peace or war; raise mighty armies and navies; for- 
tify on land and on sea ; tax ourselves to the exhausting of all 
our substance ; nnd sacrifice" ourselves by hundreds of thousands 
upon fiields of crimson gore — yet all will be in vain. The 



A Solution of Our National Difficulties. 53 

prosperity, power and glory of the great American Republic 
has already departed beyond retrieving, unless Ave return to 
first principles, to the " Constitution as it is, and the Union as 
it was;" or in other words, to the freedom of speech, purity of 
elections, and sovereignty of the constitutional majority. 

The men of this generation may live to see this rebellion and 
war cease ; the Slavery question settled; the abolitionists of 
the North and the slaveholders of the South united together in 
the greatest harmony and friendship — we have already seen 
stranger things than these — but neither we, nor our cliildrcn, 
will see permanent peace and prosperity here, unless it be estab- 
lished upon the basis of these first principles of the Constitution. 
Peace we may have, but so soon as the country recovers from 
its exhaustion, war will again be renewed. The Slavery ques- 
tion may be settled, but a hundred others there are, any one of 
which may spring up in -a day, and become just as difficult. 
The South may be united to the North in the strongest feelino-s 
of nationality ; yet the West may separate from the East — a 
separation that geographically would be much more natural, 
easier to consummate, and more difficult to prevent — and then 
divisions, and subdivisions, and reunitings will succeed each 
other without end. 

Without a return to first principles of the Government, it is 
impossible to tell precisely what is in the future for us ; but it 
is quite safe to predict that insecurity, instability, weakness 
and disgrace will characterize our course. It is not likelv that 
we shall be either united or separated; Ave shall have neither 
Monarchy, Aristocracy or Republic, but a continual strife be- 
tween the principles of all these, Avith ever varied and uncertain 
result. On the contrary, hoAvever, if Ave noAV unite as one man 
in returning to the pure principles of republicanism, the free- 
dom of speech, purity of elections, and the sovereignty of the 
majority, as instituted and practiced by the Fathers, and these 
faithfully adhere to and apply, in the settlement of all our 
difficulties, and in the adjustment of all our rights and interests, 
then, bright and gloriuus beyond description, Avill be the future 
of this great country. 



54 A Solufion of Our National Difficulties. 



CHAPTER lY. 

CONCLUDING REMAEKS. 

THE PRESENT CIVIL AVAR. 

All must agree, that upon the whole, the present war is one 
of neither profit nor lionor to the country, or to the institu- 
tions of our Fathers. Every person who is truly a friend to 
these free institutions bequeathed to us, must be anxious for 
the termination of this bloody strife, as early as possible. The 
question is, how shall it be made to cease ? 

The principles already established, by the reasonino- of this 
solution, furnish a ready answer for this question. The sov- 
ereignty of the constitutional majority, is the principle upon 
which peace must come to us, if it ever comes at all, A peace 
not having this principle for its basis, would be no peace. The 
constitutional majority is our sovereign. This sovereign 
authority speaks to us through the Government at Washington 
City. Let us all obey. If we do this, those of us in arms 
against the Government, will lay them down, and the vrar will 
cease at once ; or for want of this action on their part, then 
those of us who are loyal will unite all our efforts under the 
direction of the Government, to compel them to do so until 
the object is accomplished, and then the war will cease. The 
process is simple indeed, and he that runs may read and know 
his duty in the crisis. It is all a delusion, or something worse, 
for any man to pretend to be a friend to peace, unless he is in 
pursuit of it upon the plan marked out by the Government. 
That plan may not be the best, but at the very worst, it is 
surely better than any number of conflicting ones, 

EMANCIPATION AS A WAR MEASURE. 

To discuss the subject of emancipation, in any of its forms, 
would be a departure from the objects of this work. It is 
proper to observe, however, that it is the duty of the Govern- 
ment to put down this rebellion at any and every cost of life 
and property that may be necessary. Though it should be 
admitted that slaves are property, yet surely they are no more 
sacred than other property. 

Circumstances may justify the burning of a whole cit}^, where 
half the people are loyal. And circumstances may justify the 
destruction of the institution of Slavery in a part or a whole of 



A Solu/ion of Our National Difficulties. 55 

the Slave States, though half of the slaveholders deprived of 
their slaves should be loyal. Now, it is not likely that one 
slaveholder in ten, in the districts affected by the President's 
proclamation, is loyal. But, after all, Avhcthcr the circumstan- 
ces of justification exist, for the em.ancipation measure, is, like 
every other act of the Government, a fair subject for discussion 
amongst all the people, guarding, however, against any abuse 
in the instigation of resistance. 

MILITARY ARRESTS. 

" The Constitution as it is," requires the President to " take 
care that the laws be faithfully executed." This provision is 
unqualified in its terms. There is no limit of time, or place, 
or manner. Of course, in seasons of great rebellion, like the 
present, he cannot do it to perfection, but at all times and 
places he is to accomplish it as near to perfection as he is able. 
In peace and in war, in loyal -and disloyal districts, this is to be 
his care. 

Now, suppose it to be a time of peace, but the President has 
reliable information that certain persons, in some section of the 
country, arc laboring successfully to set on foot a gigantic 
rebellion, with a view to set at defiance and overthrow the laws. 
Or suppose a rebellion actually exists in one section of the 
country, and he has information that in the loyal part of the 
country there are persons who are aiding or abetting it. What 
is the duty of the President under such circumstances ? If 
either or both of the other branches of the Government, the 
Courts or the Congress, should interpose their authoritv, and 
stop these men in their work of treason, then, of course, the 
President would have nothing to do in the premises. And, in 
fact, if the other branches of the Government always could and 
would take care to see that the laws are faithfully executed, 
then there would be no necessity for this provision of the Con- 
stitution, requiring the President to do it. But in cases like 
the above, where for any cause whatever, the other branches of 
the Government fail to do this work, then surely the President 
has it to do ; otherwise the words of the Constitution have no 
meaning. 

But the question arises, how and by what instrumentalities 
is he to do the work of executing the laws ? The Courts may 
be open for the transaction of business, but they are no instru- 
ments in his hands for any purpose. They are not subject to 
his command. They constitute one separate branch of the 
Government and he another. The Courts are efficient in their 
own way and time in taking care for the faithful execution of the 
laws, but what they do, is done independent of the President's 
authority, and without his command or instigation. When it 



56 A Solution of Our Naiional Difficulties. 

comes the Presidcnt\s time, then, to act for this purpose, what 
are the instrumentalities with which he is to work? Phiinly he 
must use the instrumentalities that are under his control — that 
is, the army and navy. It is for this purpose that an army 
and navy are kept constantly on hand, in times of peace as 
well as in times of war, of which the President himself, by the 
provisions of the Constitution, is at all times the Commander- 
in-Chief. 

Whenever and wherever, then, in times of peace or in times 
of war, in loyal or disloyal districts, there are combinations or 
influences tending to the destruction of the laws, and which 
the Courts can not or do not control, the President is to employ 
this army or navy, or both, as the case requires. And when 
he does so, to arrest and imprison those who are instigating or 
waging war against the laws, is the very mildest form certainly, 
that he can possibly deal with them consistent with his duty 
and the safety of the country ; and if the insurgents are too 
numerous to be kept under in this manner, his plain duty is to 
engage in a very timely use of bayonets and bullets. 

Now, had the President of the United States performed this 
simple, plain, constitutional duty, at the first instigation of this 
rebellion, and been sustained in it by all who were really loyal 
at heart, the rebellion would never have gained any dangerous 
character. The timorous fears inspired in the hearts of loyal 
men, by the hue and cry of traitorg, against the exercise by the 
President of his constitutional powers for suppressing this 
rebellion, is the chief hand-maid of the rebellion itself, that 
first helped it into existence, and has nourished it from its 
birth. But after all, this distrust of the President, and this 
fettering of his hands by popular influences, while the enemies 
of the Government are preying upon its vitals, is but an infrac- 
tion of the great fundamental law of the sovereignty of the 
constitutional majority already discussed. 

WHO IS ACCOUNTABLE FOR THE REBELLION. 

We have heard much controversy in reference to the respon- 
sibity of this rebellion. Some charge it upon the Republican 
party, others upon the Democratic ; some say it is upon the 
people of the North, others upon those of the South, and a 
variety of other opinions are held. Wlioever is responsible for 
the destruction of free speech, the purity of elections and the 
sovereignty of the majority, is responsible for the rebellion. 
Judging by this rule, very few of us, if any, will wholly escape. 
Let us consider this matter. First, let us see who is accounta- 
ble for the destruction of the freedom of speech. 

It is true, the Southern people have committed the outrages 
by which our national freedom of speech was destroyed. But 



A /Solution of Our National Difficulties. 57 

in this country, wherein every citizen is a sovereign, men are 
not only responsible for what they do, but for what they neglect 
to do. For thirty or forty years this destruction of free speech 
has been going on constantly, with the full knowledge of every 
citizen in the nation, the people have all the tinie had in their 
hands the plain constitutional power to prevent it at any time. 
And now the question arises, who is there that has done any 
thing towards this object? What party, in any section of the 
country, has proposed and urged, at any time, the proper con- 
stitutional appliance to stay this destruction ? If any party 
has ever done this, the fact has not come to the knowledge of 
the writer. There are, or have been, parties that have said 
much in platforms, resolutions and orations, in extolling the 
right of free speech, but those who have dwelt most in this 
strain have most completely ignored the fact of its notorious 
violation and destruction. Many of the Northern people have 
indulged freely in the use of harsh epithets towards these 
Southern people, for destroying this freedom of speech, and 
more especially for the outrages upon persons and property 
that have been resorted to for the accomplishment of the 
purpose, but these epithets constitute no remedy for the evil — 
none in the least. 

In reference to the purity of elections, so far as this has 
been destroyed by violent means in the Slave States, the 
responsibility rests in all. respects precisely with that for 
the destruction of free speech, because accomplished by the 
same species of violence on the part of the Southern people, 
and the same criminal neglect on the part of the Northern. 
But so far as the purity of elections has been destroyed by 
threats of insurrection, the people of the North and South are 
almost equally culpable for it. Because this argument of 
danger to the Union, has been used in commoncver ywhere — 
North as well as South — and everywhere the people have been 
more or less corrupted by it. 

So in respect to the subversion of the sovereignty of the 
majority; the people of the North and South have in common 
aided each other in the accomplishment of this purpose. The 
three great compromises of the country, each of which was 
but the result of a separate and distinct contest for supremacy 
between the majority and minority, in which the former bowed 
in humble submission to the latter, were supported in Congress 
by the representatives of the North as well as the South, and 
acquiesced in by their constituencies at home, and more or less 
by all parties. 

Moreover, in the early stages of the rebellion, when a num- 
ber of the States were hesitating in reference to the question 
6 



58 A Solution of Our National Difficulties. 

of secession, and were trying as best they could, by the aid of 
such lights as were afforded, to look forward and read the final 
result, and to count the costs and profits of the undertaking of 
rebellion; in such a critical moment as this, thousands in the 
Northern States spoke and said, if the South desire to secede, 
let them go, Ave should not restrain them. Some of these men 
said, we have no right to coerce these States to remain in the 
Union ; and others said, it is not our interest to do so. Many 
of the latter class Avere men of great influence in the party of 
the then incoming administration. Noav, who cannot see that 
these men exercised a powerful and direct influence in giving 
strength and encouragement to the rebellion. Such remarks 
as these, coming from men of such influence and association 
in politics, tended more to encourage and extend the rebellion, 
than any thing that the same number of any Southern men 
could possibly have done or said, because it gave to the South- 
ern people the understanding that in any war that might be 
waged to subdue them, the North itself Avould be divided and 
weakened. 

Now if there is any citizen who has done all he could to stay 
the destruction of the freedom of speech, the purity of elec- 
tions, and the sovereignty of the majority, by all his influence 
amongst the people, and by petitioning and invoking the proper 
action of the Government, and has, at no time, done or said 
any thing tending to the destruction of these fundamental 
principles, nor in any manner to encourage rebellion, then 
such citizen is in no manner accountable for the rebellion, but 
all others are, in some measure. 

HOW SHOULD THE REBELS BE DEALT WITH WHEN CONQUERED ? 

It has been almost the universal practice in other countries, 
to visit upon the leaders of conquered rebellion the punish- 
ment of death, and it may be that it would be best to do so 
here in this instance. But the Avriter of this solution is of a 
contrary opinion. And the principle reason for this opinion, 
is that the responsibility for this rebellion rests not wholly upon 
those who engaged in it. As already seen, it rests with more or 
less weight upon nearly or quite every citizen of the country. 
By almost universal acquiescence and co-operation there has 
been such a subversion of the Government, and disregard of 
its first principles, as really to justify those who have rebelled, 
in the belief that the people of the country at large had aban- 
doned its maintenance, or lacked the intelligence necessary for 
the purpose. In other v^ords they have been really deceived 
into their present unhappy condition. 

Had the majority of the people stood up uniformly and un- 
flincliingly, and insisted upon the maintenance of the freedom 



A Solution of Our National Difficulties. 59 

of speech, purity of elections and the sovereignty of the 
majority, and this rebellion had been engaged in with a view 
to subvert these fundamental principles, thus supported by the 
majority themselves, the case Avould have been far different. 
As it really was, the Government was virtually abandoned by 
common consent, many years before the rebels appeared in 
arms against it, and in its stead, a system of loose voluntary 
association and regulation adopted. And when the war was 
commenced by the rebellious States, it was not strictly a war 
for revolution, nor designed so to be ; but the ends sought to 
be obtained by it, were perfectly consistent with the principle 
of voluntary association and voluntary obedience, that had 
been then recognized in the legislation and administration of 
the Government for forty years previous. It is true, seces- 
sion or disunion had never been approved by the majority of 
the people, but the system of compromises that was introduced, 
to preserve the Union, Avas but a recognition of the right to 
secede, and when secession was actually attempted, it was 
strictly in accordance with these precedents of right thus estab- 
lished by the majority. In accordance with these precedents 
the rebels had reason to expect that there Avould be little or no 
attempt to coerce them, but only to compromise, to induce them 
to remain in the Union. 

Now, the truth is, we were all more or less in faidt, both 
Government and people, rebels and loyalists. We had all 
abandoned " the Constitution as it is, and the Union as it was." 
And when this war broke out, the change of principles was 
more with the Government than with the rebels. And now to 
hold the rebels strictly as such, would be somewhat in the 
nature of expost facto legislation. 

Upon the whole, it is here suggested, not without deference, 
however, that the rebels, for the most part, be ultimately 
restored to all their rights of citizenship, so fast as they are 
willing to subscribe and support heartily " the Constitution as 
it is, and the Union as it was," with the express understanding, 
however, that these phrases are to be taken as including 
the freedom of speech — including the press — the purity of all 
elections, and the invariable sovereignty of the constitutional 
majority. And it is further suggested, but with the same 
deference, however, that none of the rebels, who shall submit 
unreservedly to the power of the Government, including the 
very foremost of the leaders, shall ever be subject to any 
greater punishment, than to be deprived of the privilege of 
voting at any election whatsoever, or to hold any office of 
profit, honor or trust, under the Government of the States, or 
of any State or Territory, or to hold property. For when the 



60 A Solution of Our National Difficulties. 

mass of the people of the rebellious States, under the benign 
influence of free speech, shall learn how terribly they have 
been misled and deceived by their leaders, those leaders will 
be consigned to an infamy lower, and more to be dreaded, than 
the grave itself. 

OUR TRUST -MUST RK IN GOD. 

After all that is said, or can be said, it is not in the wisdon> 
of man alone to preserve this nation. As a people we have 
been established by Him ; His ways are above our ways. It 
is to the God of the Bible, the Creator of all things, that we 
are indebted for our goodly heritage, our miraculous preserva- 
tion, and an unrivalled prosperity. A nation thus favored 
must not forget its benefactor. We must be essentially a reli- 
gious people or no people. Precisely to the extent that we 
trust in our own strength alone, God will disclose our weakness. 
In proportion as we discard his laws, he will render ours of no 
avail; and in proportion as we reject his counsels, he will 
divide, confound and bring to naught, ours. 

In the darkest days of the revolution, wlien General Wash- 
ington was charged with his weightiest cares, anxieties and 
labors, he did not leave all the praying to be done by his chap- 
lains, but he himself raised his OAvn voice and hands in suppli- 
cation of that help that no human power could afford. Why^ 
then, should it be thought a thing beneath the dignity, or time 
or +,alents of our President, our Senators, Representatives and 
Judges to do the same ? Upon each man, whatever may be 
his rank or condition in life, rests a relijjious obligation that 
no one else can discharge for him. 

We must not only be a praying peo})le, but we must luiw,'^ 
the true spirit of Christianity. We must fear God, and not 
mock him with vain oblations, whilst our heart is full of ex- 
tortion, excess and all manner of iterverseness. In all our 
relations, public and private, we must deal justly, love mercy, 
and walk humbly with God: so shall our days be prolonged in 
the land which the Lord our God has given us. 



B B 9. 3. 1 






'^o. 



-/=> 



-n.-o^ 



' ^^ 



DC. jS oROS. 

LIBMAIIV aiNDINQ 



ST. AUGUSTINE 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 




